Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Why the lib-dems are shit

Alastair Campbell did a drawing for the Great Ormond Street Hospital hare styling draw:

YreQYl.jpg


http://www.harestyling.com/canvas/alastair-campbell/
 
Here's a masterpiece of self-delusion that i meed last week - and this sort of stuff seems increasingly prevalent amongst these clowns - what's even better is that it comes from one of the 'good' lib-dems, one of the ones people on the left here thought might be on their side, Evan Harris

If you want to get rid of fees vote more Lib Dems into power

If you want to get rid of tuition fees, the answer is to vote more liberal democrats into power, not less, because the only way… If you want to get rid of tuition fees realistically the only way to do it…

“If students want to get rid of tuition fees it’s more Liberal Democrats they need, not Tory and Labour.
 
Yeah, Harris has been shit - he's had a few pieces like that in the Guardian recently. I briefly regretted not registering to vote for him when that rabid Tory took his seat, but not any more. Fuck him. Fuck them. Oh, they are fucked. Jolly good. :D
 
Cutting funding to the poorest council areas whilst increasing it for the richest is the new definition of fairness.

The councils that face the biggest cuts are still overwhelmingly the poorest in the country, including many London boroughs and northern towns. In contrast, many of the "shire" councils face negligible cuts. Hackney, Tower Hamlets, Newham, Manchester, Rochdale, Knowsley, Liverpool, St Helens, Doncaster and South Tyneside are among the 36 local authorities that take the maximum cut of 8.9%.

Meanwhile, Dorset gets a 0.25% increase in funding and Windsor and Maidenhead, West Sussex, Wokingham, Richmond upon Thames and Buckinghamshire all get cuts of 1% or below.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/dec/13/eric-pickles-council-budget-cuts?CMP=twt_fd
 
Why are the Lib Dems shit? Because the NHS isn't safe in their hands.

Revised inflation estimates from the Office for Budget Responsibility, combined with increasing health care demands at both ends of the population age spectrum, and the knock on effects of cuts to local authority social care budgets, will see the NHS 'enjoy' shrinking real expenditure over this parliament.

So much for the coalition's promise 'that funding for the NHS should increase in real terms'.

Who will pay for this broken promise? Generally all of us, as service delivery is squeezed and cut. In particular NHS staff who are seeing their wages effectively reduced by a so called pay freeze.

Louis MacNeice
 
Travel grant for poorest pupils may be scrapped

The government is considering abolishing a £20m grant that has helped the poorest pupils afford the cost of travelling to school, it emerged today.

Michael Gove, the education secretary, appearing before the Commons education select committee, also admitted there will not be a real-terms rise in school budgets, as he had previously claimed. The travel grant is given to pupils in primary and secondary schools and sixth-form colleges who cannot afford their daily bus fare or train journey. These pupils go to schools and colleges some distance from their homes for reasons of religious faith or to study particular subjects.

+EMA going. Forget it.
 
They don't just have to travel for religious faith or particular subjects! They have to travel because their local schools have been hijacked by the middle-classes. There was a documentary recently - can't remember who fronted it - which went to a 'sink' school in Wimbledon where pupils were being bused in from miles around.
 
This is all part of a deliberate plan to exclude a section of the working class from education - they despise us this much.

Yep they do. Also, they appear to want the lower middle classes out of universities as well as working classes. I think they only want those that can afford private schools in Universities now.
 
Control Orders

This is what the lib-dems said in their manifesto regarding Control Orders:

Scrap control orders, which can use secret evidence to place people under house arrest.

This is them attacking the tories before the election for "saying one thing, voting another way" on the use of Control Orders.

You can’t get much clearer than that, can you? “Morally objectionable”, “deny due process”, “costly” (in reverse order of Tory concerns, I suspect). The trouble is, Baroness Neville-Jones’s words do not match the Tories’ actions.

You see, Parliament has to vote to renew control orders every year – and, in 2007, the Tories voted for their renewal.

Can anyone guess what their position is today?
 
nice one. I googled roughly the same thing! interesting they now apparenly won't publish the review until after christmas (it said on the beeb link)
 
Yep they do. Also, they appear to want the lower middle classes out of universities as well as working classes. I think they only want those that can afford private schools in Universities now.

They certainly don't want any graduates who can afford to work for the public sector...
 
I don't know. I think there's an argument to be made that creating new sources of debt is in the interests of finance capital and hence of our present government. After all, one of the causes of the recent financial crisis was arguably lack of good investment opportunities to absorb all the extra profits that have been mounting up since Pinochet, Thatcher and Reagan (and the movement they represented) started rolling back the post-war progressive gains.

Looked at as an opportunity to invest, vastly increased student debt (as long as most of them eventually pay it back) probably does seem like a good thing to them in and of itself, to say nothing of any social engineering effects.
 
That's absolutely true. A graduate tax would come in at about 3%, loan repayments come in at 9%, albeit for 'only' 30 years instead of 40 odd (the 30 lowest earning years, but only if you're not earning enough to pay it back quicker, so the highest earners pay back less than they would with a graduate tax and the rest pay more). The extra money paid back is interest - interest paid to a student loans company which Osborne is privatising (can't be keeping assets that make money for the state, any more than we can be employing tax inspectors, now can we?).
 
There's a fascinating interview with Silivia Federici here (despite the wanky title) that contains a brief discussion about the uses of student debt in the US system as a weapon of social control and planned insecurity as well as it's potential strategic use as a unifying social demand i.e

Indebtedness is already a site of struggle, but until now, at least in the US, it is a struggle that has taken place silently, under the radar, articulated through hidden forms of resistance, escape, and defaults, rather than an open confrontation. The default rate on federal student loans is continuing to rise, especially at for-profit colleges where it has topped 11.6%.
...

A key step towards it is an education campaign about the nature of debt as a political instrument of discipline, dispelling the assumption of individual responsibility and demonstrating its collective dimension. The moralism that has been accumulated over the question of indebtedness must be exposed. Acquiring a degree is not a luxury but a necessity in a context where for years education has been proclaimed at the highest institutional levels as the fault line between prosperity and a life of poverty and subordination. But if education is a must for future employment, it means that employers are the beneficiaries of it. From this viewpoint, student debt is a work issue that unions should take on, and not academic unions alone. Teachers too should join a debt abolition movement, for they are on the frontline: they must save appearances and pretend that for the university, cultural formation is of the essence. Yet, they have to accommodate to profitability requirements, like oversized classes, the gutting of departments, overworked students, carrying at times two or three jobs. Debt is also a unifying demand; it is everybody’s condition in the working class worldwide. Credit card debt, mortgage debt, medical debt: across the world, for decades now, every cut in people’s wages and entitlements has been made in the name of a debt crisis. Debt, therefore, is a universal signifier and a terrain on which a re-composition of the global work force can begin.
 
Back
Top Bottom