|
How many black people sang on the new Geldof ego song? And how many of those are African?
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 02:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 19:15 |
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:I can't tell whether you're objecting to the plans or the verbiage used to present them, but the five overarching principles you seem upset about are basically platitudes - you'd want to spend your money efficiently and have a strong economy no matter how much or how little you planned to borrow, for example. I'm objecting to the fact that instead of presenting an alternative to continue to bleed the country at the altar of the Deficit God, Labour are content to step up and say 'we'll use a smaller knife!' Cerv posted:he's not on Band Aid II Looking at the list of performers I can see why he was intimidated
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 02:22
|
|
|
There's already a catchier Francophone African charity single for the Ebola crisis anyway: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruYQY6z3mV8
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 02:29
|
|
|
TinTower posted:It's now "Well, tonight, we're reaching out and touching you". How long before a Band Aider is investigated by Operation Yew Tree?
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 02:35
|
|
|
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think baka kaba doesn't want a particular budget policy inasmuch as an ideological alternative. But chasing niche audiences with promises for spending that may (and did) have to be horse-traded away does not seem to have worked out well for Lib Dem. The outrage generated by a sense of betrayal is far noisier than any tepid support as an alternative party to begin with. Why else would a cynical mainstream political party refuse to make ambitious campaign promises? This is consistent with an observation that the audience demanding ideological alternatives doesn't really want an alternative inasmuch as their alternative, and despises heretics far more than they despise the infidel. ronya fucked around with this message at 03:24 on Nov 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 03:22
|
|
|
I kind of figured the line was taken out because it's about Ebola this year. The original line was more about haves and have nots. The same line in the Ebola remix would sound more like "thank God they have Ebola", which doesn't sit right.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 10:18
|
|
|
EvilGenius posted:I kind of figured the line was taken out because it's about Ebola this year. The original line was more about haves and have nots. The same line in the Ebola remix would sound more like "thank God they have Ebola", which doesn't sit right. "Thank God they're starving to death" isn't that nice a sentiment either. And reaching out and touching someone seems like a pretty good method of spreading Ebola.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 10:25
|
|
|
Actual political viability has never been an issue for anyone that posts here. Labour can't do what the SNP and UKIP do: Raise support on nationalism alone allowing flimsy unworkable policies to persist without scrutiny. Labour gets to say "Hi, we're um.... not reducing the deficit anymore and are continuing to borrow". Which to every pub dwelling working class armchair economist IS A REALLY BAD THING, BROWN RUINED OUR ECONOMY. The Tories would be there telling the papers that "what labour is doing is actually bad and not good!" which is then taken up by this new generation of armchair economists. The ones who "really aren't into politics" but know how Labour totally "ruined the economy". Labour are a lovely directionless party of this there is no doubt. But to expect them to be able, politically, to do anything truly radical makes no sense. The Tories have, unfortunately, controlled the zeitgeist of the country for a while now and their spin is taken as gospel by most centrists. Regarde Aduck fucked around with this message at 10:47 on Nov 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 10:45
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:"Thank God they're starving to death" isn't that nice a sentiment either. And reaching out and touching someone seems like a pretty good method of spreading Ebola. Only if you touch them in the poop 
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 11:01
|
|
|
KKKlean Energy posted:Only if you touch them in the poop
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 11:12
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:"Thank God they're starving to death" isn't that nice a sentiment either. And reaching out and touching someone seems like a pretty good method of spreading Ebola. That's the point of the lyric loving hell.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 11:21
|
|
|
Urrrrgh. Just saw a job advert for a customer service apprenticeship. Working in a call center for £2.73 an hour. Jesus.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 11:29
|
|
|
Shelf Adventure posted:Urrrrgh. Just saw a job advert for a customer service apprenticeship. Working in a call center for £2.73 an hour. Jesus. These have been around for a loving age, my wife has worked with a few in a customer service call centre. At least it isn't sales. What gets me is that ALDI has apprentices now as well - a supermarket that prides itself on paying above the minimum wage. For operating tills and shelf stacking. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 11:32
|
|
|
Shelf Adventure posted:Urrrrgh. Just saw a job advert for a customer service apprenticeship. Working in a call center for £2.73 an hour. Jesus. Thats a standard apprenticeship wage for the first year, then it goes up to minimum wage.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 11:33
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Thats a standard apprenticeship wage for the first year, then it goes up to minimum wage. It's not really something that should in any way be an apprenticeship, though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 11:40
|
|
|
That's true enough.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 11:41
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Thats a standard apprenticeship wage for the first year, then it goes up to minimum wage. If they don't fire you and replace you with a new apprentice
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 11:46
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Thats a standard apprenticeship wage for the first year, then it goes up to minimum wage. Which would be handy if the burn rate for call centre workers was more than 3 months. Pissflaps posted:That's the point of the lyric loving hell. Aaand that's the point I was trying to make.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 11:47
|
|
|
tentish klown posted:If they don't fire you and replace you with a new apprentice This, and if you become an apprentice aged 16 you're on £2.73 for three years. Oddly, this rate of pay isn't provided on the official Apprenticeship website. goddamnedtwisto posted:Which would be handy if the burn rate for call centre workers was more than 3 months.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 11:53
|
|
|
So I've been digging a bit more to see if I can find a worse apprenticeship - I've just seen one for working in a petrol station shop. It has 29 applications. It's just kind of saddening.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 12:06
|
|
|
Shelf Adventure posted:It's not really something that should in any way be an apprenticeship, though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 12:10
|
|
|
It's just how brazen of an abuse these apprenticeships are that's galling. One has "previous experience of working in an outbound calling sales role is desirable." How do they even pretend to justify that someone needs an apprenticeship if they already have experience doing the job?
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 12:15
|
|
|
That poo poo's just par for the course now. You'll find it everywhere, not just apprenticeships. It's brilliant really. You end up paying trainee wages, without actually having to pay for training. I call it best of both worlds recruiting. tooterfish fucked around with this message at 12:45 on Nov 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 12:42
|
|
|
Shelf Adventure posted:So I've been digging a bit more to see if I can find a worse apprenticeship Unless that's a separate job at big chain pubs. They're generally terrible anyway from what I've heard. Apprentice apprentice, previous experience of apprenticeships desirable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 12:48
|
|
|
How much should 16 year old apprentices be paid do you think?
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 12:49
|
|
|
Burqa King posted:How much should 16 year old apprentices be paid do you think? That depends on whether you're talking about genuine apprentices or people working low entry jobs that require minimum training or knowledge.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 13:04
|
|
|
Do you think a real apprenticeship should pay less?
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 13:07
|
|
|
Burqa King posted:How much should 16 year old apprentices be paid do you think? Minimum wage at least? If you're doing an apprenticeship for a job that'd pay Minimum wage once completed then someone is taking the piss. Paying less for an Apprenticeship for a job like Plumbing or Accounting is fair, it offsets the cost of having to train someone up in a job that'll pay fairly well once completed. Apprenticeship for Retail Assistant (Working a till) can gently caress right off though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 13:08
|
|
|
It could be worse. They could be interning.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 13:12
|
|
|
Burqa King posted:Do you think a real apprenticeship should pay less? Yeah. They're educating you in the skills and knowledge required for the job and you get a qualification at the end of it. You're sacrificing some of your wage to pay for specialist training for a profession or trade. For the most part, you don't get paid to go to university.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 13:17
|
|
|
Burqa King posted:Do you think a real apprenticeship should pay less? An apprenticeship should offer "valuable" job skills that are at least transferrable and usable in both other jobs and the real world (i.e. practical skills), because otherwise it's loving worthless. My dad started as an apprentice, moved onto a living wage, and still works for the same company in a reduced role (mainly because they exported the vast majority of their jobs to Hungary and are winding down).
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 13:19
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:They could be interning. Unpaid interning is especially weird because if they do work that benefits the Employer then by law they're entitled to a wage, but unless they outright ask for it most never get paid and I can't imagine the one's who do ask go on to do well. Companies use this weird "It's a Volunteer position with no fixed hours" defense attempt to try work around this but that only really works for Charities, most unpaid internships are straight up illegal if anyone bothered to actually pursue them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 13:22
|
|
|
Shelf Adventure posted:For the most part, you don't get paid to go to university. But you also don't work for the university. If my University had asked me as part of the course to sweep the corridors, cut the grass and make them some T-Shirts for them to sell I'd have told them to gently caress off. It's more like a Placement or Sandwich Year, which you do get paid for.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 13:24
|
|
|
There are also unpaid traineeships now, which is p much an apprenticeship for an apprenticeship. quote:Traineeship information for heroic wealth creators quote:Traineeship information for useless skiver-scroungers 
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 13:26
|
|
|
I've heard of management apprenticeships for these sorts of companies that involve the person working in all aspects of the business to learn about it but never one for just the phone lines. Very strange.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 13:33
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:I've heard of management apprenticeships for these sorts of companies that involve the person working in all aspects of the business to learn about it but never one for just the phone lines. Very strange. It's not strange at all. You get to pay them less for doing the same job. It's illegal, but no one is going to report it or care.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 13:54
|
|
|
Shelf Adventure posted:For the most part, you don't get paid to go to university. still do in other countries
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 14:46
|
|
|
Cerv posted:used to Some courses you still do - like teaching.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 14:56
|
|
|
Cerv posted:used to A much larger proportion of the population now goes to university.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 15:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 19:15 |
|
|
And? The original rationale for free tuition was that an educated population is a net benefit to the country. Did that stop being true when more people went to university for some reason?
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 16:15
|
|
