|
Party Boat posted:The most favorable way I can read that is that if >20% of your decisions are overturned at reconsideration then you go into the low performing group i.e. it's a measure for the original assessor, not the person doing the reconsideration. Yup, that's the bullshit line I am hearing at the moment as well.
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 18:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 07:06 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/bspeed8/status/864473408377114624
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 19:22
|
|
|
Zephro posted:http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2017/05/16/what-the-hell-is-labour-s-brexit-policy-part-1-467 anyone hoping for a soft brexit was being extremely optimistic since the people who wanted the end of free movement won
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 19:25
|
|
|
ukle posted:Here is Sir Henry's blog where he explains it - The press 10 years ago would have been going after Labour. There's yer secret reason the press aren't as hostile.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
So I got electon spam from the Tories, due to being registered for a postal vote. It's got May's photo and her name all over the place, only one or two mentions of my actual local Tory MP. Warning of "Corbyn chaos", "coalition chaos" and all that sort of stuff. Goes in with the "Theresa May: Strong and Stable" polls better than "The Conservative Party".
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
Neither the blog nor the FOI request make clear exactly *whose* performance is being measured. It does not appear to be a corporate level indicator, as I can find no reference to it within their Departmental Plan nor its accompanying technical notes. This makes it extremely likely it is an operational level target - that a particular section within DWP is expected to meet. It does not state who is accountable for it. This leaves the two most likely scenarios as: If the KPI is intended to measure the performance of those staff/sections who are considering/judging the mandatory reviews (as Twitter folk are assuming), then yes, there is a significant conflict of interest there, as it creates pressure to distort the outcomes of the reviews. This would be very disturbing if true (given the impact on claimants), but there is no confirmation on it so far. If the KPI is intended to measure the performance of those staff/sections responsible for doing initial assessments of claimants, then it would seem an appropriate performance target, as it measures the accuracy of their assessments. Someone whose assessments are consistently overturned upon review is clearly not doing a good job.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 19:48
|
|
|
Tigey posted:Neither the blog nor the FOI request make clear exactly *whose* performance is being measured. It does not appear to be a corporate level indicator, as I can find no reference to it within their Departmental Plan nor its accompanying technical notes. This makes it extremely likely it is an operational level target - that a particular section within DWP is expected to meet. It does not state who is accountable for it. You're forgetting that there are also targets for number of sanctions issued. So we have a system where DWP staff are being told on the one hand to take away people's benefits for spurious reasons, and on the other to reject what must be legitimate appeals to prevent those people sanctioned getting back on the books.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
e: Yeah ok it's Tito. I was wondering why it leaned so much on the nationalistic side. Private Speech fucked around with this message at 20:13 on May 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
ukle posted:Here is Sir Henry's blog where he explains it -
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
I would tend to suggest that if you are governing out of a desire to ensure the welfare of as many as possible you're going to, by virtue of governments being limited among quasi-national lines, develop some kind of nationalism-ish thing. Because you can't really help but have your thoughts and policies be limited by the extent of your power to govern, by the extent of your nation. So I can see the idea of "socialist patriotism" as he puts it but it's really hard to describe that idea without dog whistling to ethnic nationalists so probably best if you try to avoid waxing poetic about your nationalist socialism.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I would tend to suggest that if you are governing out of a desire to ensure the welfare of as many as possible you're going to, by virtue of governments being limited among quasi-national lines, develop some kind of nationalism-ish thing. Because you can't really help but have your thoughts and policies be limited by the extent of your power to govern, by the extent of your nation. It's a Tito quote edit. Tito was bit of a tit.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I would tend to suggest that if you are governing out of a desire to ensure the welfare of as many as possible you're going to, by virtue of governments being limited among quasi-national lines, develop some kind of nationalism-ish thing. Because you can't really help but have your thoughts and policies be limited by the extent of your power to govern, by the extent of your nation. It's from 1948 (peasants?)
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:It's from 1948 (peasants?) I figured it wasn't Corbyn because it doesn't sound like him, just something I thought about a while ago, interesting that other people have written about it. Anyone written about it that wasn't a tit?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
both paragraphs are wholly correct. marxism and the national question by dread captain stalin is considered the foundational document on the issue
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
Fans posted:But I love you all sorry u beautiful person
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 20:27
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I figured it wasn't Corbyn because it doesn't sound like him, just something I thought about a while ago, interesting that other people have written about it. R. Guyovich posted:both paragraphs are wholly correct. marxism and the national question by dread captain stalin is considered the foundational document on the issue Not everyone agrees with Stalin, and if anything he was even more of a nationalist than Tito. Both perhaps had the excuse of leading multi-ethnic nations they had to hold together, but many of their acts - persecution of Jews and Germans, walking back many provisions for women and gay people established under Lenin, in Stalin's case the partial restitution of orthodox church during WWII, oppression of peoples of certain less-powerful nations, and of course the brutal persecution of anyone with a conflicting vision for communism - are horrid and hardly give them a good name. I posted a link to a speech by Deutscher from 1964 on the topic of internationalism in the WTO thread. Private Speech fucked around with this message at 20:35 on May 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
Stalin was a poo poo
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:Stalin was a poo poo He could at least pull off his moustache unlike all the former Soviet country dictators these days
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 20:37
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:Stalin was a poo poo how loving dare you attack orthodox Marxism-Leninism
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
Georgia will be the place to be once antibiotics stop working though
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
Labour's manifesto must be loving good for the top story on the Telegraph to be Ian Brady. The major attack line so far is that it's a tax raid on the 'middle class'. Not sure if many people will buy it since the 80k income part is fairly well publicised.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Not sure if the author is a trot (always a risk), but here's something by Richard Greeman on the topic, and the particular bit that I might get probated for:quote:The Third International. A number of anti-war Socialists – among them Luxemburg, Lenin, Trotsky – resisted the Second International’s collapse into “social-patriotism” and held a series of conferences in Switzerland during the war, laying the framework for a new, truly revolutionary and internationalist organization. In 1917 the Russian Revolution put one of these socialist parties in power (the Bolsheviks). At the end of the imperialist World War, a revolutionary wave swept across Europe, and in 1919 the Third (or “Communist”) International was organized in Moscow. However, because of the difficulty for the European anti-war Socialists to get to Moscow, the weakness of their national organizations, and the superior experience and organization of the victorious Bolshevik Party, the Russians naturally dominated the new world organization of labor from the start. From this “natural” supremacy to manipulating the Third International in favor of the evolving national interests of the new Russian regime was but a short step. Slowly, local Communist Parties evolved into rubber stamps, following the twists and turns of the “Party line” dictated by the Politburo in Moscow – up to and including collaboration with the Nazis during the notorious Stalin-Hitler Pact of 1939-1941.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 20:45
|
|
|
most "internationalist" critiques of the soviet union either willfully or unknowingly ignore the importance of imperialism in dictating the ussr's options and actions, especially considering the context of the desperate interwar period. it's ahistorical and goes against materialism entirely
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 20:51
|
|
|
Mm while I'm not super fond of marxism-leninism it's really not difficult in hindsight to see how you get to the bad parts of it with the best of intent.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
Meanwhile in Oxford...quote:An Oxford University student who stabbed her boyfriend with a bread knife may not go to jail because it could damage her prospects of a medical career, a court has heard. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/may/16/oxford-university-lavinia-woodward-stabbed-boyfriend-may-avoid-jail
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
for instance it is possible to (correctly) decry the second world war as a conflict between imperialist forces and also acknowledge those forces, up to the last possible moment, uniformly wished for the ussr to be destroyed and for socialism to survive it was necessary to take unsavory precaution against an attack on the unprepared red army
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
Looke posted:Meanwhile in Oxford... That's called good practice for the Tory NHS. If you pay a preimum they sharpen the breadknife first.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 20:55
|
|
|
Looke posted:Meanwhile in Oxford... I thought drugs was exactly how you lose any medical career lol
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 20:56
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:for instance it is possible to (correctly) decry the second world war as a conflict between imperialist forces and also acknowledge those forces, up to the last possible moment, uniformly wished for the ussr to be destroyed and for socialism to survive it was necessary to take unsavory precaution against an attack on the unprepared red army Shame about the gulags eh?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
Scientifically the right thing to do was shoot all those poles in the neck and it's wrong to deny that
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 21:08
|
|
|
2 new polls today 1 of which is interesting - https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/864496035820908546 https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/864499177224630272 Later fieldwork etc, might show there has been a slight swing to Labour. Tories are still going to win, but if Labour keep this up and it might end up with only with the Tories only having a 50 seat majority, instead of a 100+; it wont happen as that poll is likely to be an outlier, but the polling done today could be interesting.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 21:12
|
|
|
Looke posted:Meanwhile in Oxford... OwlFancier posted:I would tend to suggest that if you are governing out of a desire to ensure the welfare of as many as possible you're going to, by virtue of governments being limited among quasi-national lines, develop some kind of nationalism-ish thing. Because you can't really help but have your thoughts and policies be limited by the extent of your power to govern, by the extent of your nation.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 21:22
|
|
|
Wait is the new mod just horselord with mod powers?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Medics are among the few professions allowed to stick knifes in other people but I thought doing it without their informed consent was considered poor practice and liable to end a career. It's a bit pointless letting her off because as the article points out she has to disclose the offence and last time I checked medical regulatory bodies frown upon attempted murder
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 21:27
|
|
|
Namtab posted:Wait is the new mod just horselord with mod powers? Call him 'vozhd'.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 21:27
|
|
|
At least my political and social enemies had better hope the nmc frowns on murder....
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
hm yes pointing out context IS the same thing as saying the ussr never made a mistake, right you are posters
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 07:06 |
|
|
Hm yes saying it was necessary is not excusing anything. Quite.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 21:41
|
|