|
LemonDrizzle posted:While it's self-evidently true that the state saves money (at least in the short term) by importing skilled childless workers, it's more than a little ridiculous to hold up an application for the civil service graduate scheme as evidence of a willingness to integrate with society - you're essentially saying "to demonstrate my commitment to the country I am willing to accept a prestigious and well-paid office job that provides great security of employment, a well-defined career path, and an outstanding pension." Lol if you think any of these things apply to civil service jobs, especially since 2010.
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 12:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 06:38 |
|
|
Zeppelin Insanity posted:Could you please explain what an ex-poly is? goddamnedtwisto posted:Lol if you think any of these things apply to civil service jobs, especially since 2010.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 12:45
|
|
|
Zeppelin Insanity posted:people would much rather be on benefits than do a job that is "beneath them". You can go gently caress yourself. We have enough people who erroneously believe this with out importing more.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 13:16
|
|
|
Your English is fantastic - had it not been for the topic, it would be difficult to tell you were a non native speaker, never mind one who isn't living here. Is the EFL teaching in Poland particularly awesome? Prince John fucked around with this message at 13:21 on Aug 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 13:19
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:One of the former polytechnics - institutions that originally offered more vocational courses but were 'upgraded' to universities in 1992. It should be noted that some of them are quite well regarded but collectively they're less prestigious and generally have lower admission requirements than older universities. Well I suppose it's well-paid and prestigious compared to working in a McDonalds but comparable skills in the Civil Service will get you at best 80% of the wage you could get in the private sector, and while that's always been the case previously the job security and good pension was the upside, the Tories have torn that to shreds in the last 5 years (total pay freeze for 3 years, way-below-inflation raises since, ending final salary pensions, etc). Of course in a few more years the fact that the only people left in the Civil Service will be those unable to get better private-sector jobs will be used as ammunition to cut it even further and outsource even more, regardless of what colour of Tories get in.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 13:20
|
|
|
To be clear, I am very much against cutting benefits. I'm as leftist as they come. I think the demonisation of benefits in the UK is one of the worst things about the country. I think the talking point that benefits make people lazy is disgusting, and not at all what I was getting at. Perhaps I am completely incorrect. I admittedly do not have data, it is simply an impression I get as a foreigner, and it's the same in my country. I know many people who scoff at paying jobs and look down on them while being unemployed. No need for insults. Prince John posted:Your English is fantastic - had it not been for the topic, it would be difficult to tell you were a non native speaker, never mind one who isn't living here. Is the EFL teaching in Poland particularly awesome? Thank you. Yes and no. Poland has a big emphasis on foreign language teaching, particularly English. Two foreign languages is mandatory all throughout education up until university, where it's usually one, though depending on subject you might get two or none. It's largely tied into prospects of working abroad, and every parent will encourage their child to learn a foreign language as much as possible. But most find it very difficult, and despite trying, still end up with just a very basic knowledge. I'm a bit of an exception because I really like the English language, I have plenty of friends all over the world (and proximity to English friends is one of the big reasons I want to immigrate) and use it on a daily basis. I actually think in English, which makes me sound super awkward in Polish. Zeppelin Insanity fucked around with this message at 13:30 on Aug 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 13:24
|
|
|
Zeppelin Insanity posted:Could you please explain what an ex-poly is? I haven't met with the term before. Politechnika  The brits went and converted all their polys into mostly not-great universities in a bid to (correct me if I'm wrong) fulfil the Blair government's silly pledge of 50% people going to uni. In true technocratic fashion, they gutted a useful system of vocational training and rebranded it for the sake of satisfying a self-selected and meaningless statistic. I'm actually kind of in the opposite situation to you. Her Majesty's government funded 7 years of my specialised education and associated room+board. Still, the current nebulous interpretation of citizenship application rules means that these years do not count as far as that's concerned. Not that I need UK citizenship for anything in particular, but it does make me much more likely to take my years of UK-sponsored research experience and go somewhere with nicer weather, better politics, or ideally both. It's me, I am the immigrant bleeding the country dry. EDIT: Prince John posted:Is the EFL teaching in Poland particularly awesome? Last I checked it was not even remotely at this level. Granted, that was years ago. I would guess many hours of private lessons were had (very common in Poland) but even then that is very impressive. (Protip: tendency to misplace the article is common tell-tale sign of Polish person. Also, an overuse, of commas. Not saying Zepp does this, just sayin'.) DashingGentleman fucked around with this message at 13:35 on Aug 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 13:25
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:Well I suppose it's well-paid and prestigious compared to working in a McDonalds but comparable skills in the Civil Service will get you at best 80% of the wage you could get in the private sector, and while that's always been the case previously the job security and good pension was the upside, the Tories have torn that to shreds in the last 5 years (total pay freeze for 3 years, way-below-inflation raises since, ending final salary pensions, etc). This isn't really true. The ONS produced this study as at 2013. Public sector workers are paid between 2.2 and 3.1% higher after adjusting for different jobs and personnel characteristics. Once you correct for organisation size, the pay is estimated at 1.3% and 2.4% lower than the private sector. Lower paid public sector workers earn 13% more on average than private sector, or 8% more after correcting for organisation size. The only time the public sector is disadvantaged by a number like 20% is for the top 5% of workers for the London area only. The difference is 11% less nationally for that top 5%. You'll note that this is only comparing pay rather than pensions, job security etc. quote:
Prince John fucked around with this message at 13:31 on Aug 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 13:29
|
|
|
For the record, I don't think immigration is a bad thing. If you want to come over here and work, all the more power to you. Feel free to use the NHS aswell, it's what it's there for -- might aswell have people get some benefit from it before it's dismantled.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 13:35
|
|
|
Zeppelin Insanity posted:Those who are pushed out of lower income jobs don't exist, because most British (this applies to nearly every country, but we are talking about the UK here) people would much rather be on benefits than do a job that is "beneath them". That's a bit poo poo, I don't think that's true for the majority of people. quote:
I assumed it's to see how you did in a range of subjects, even if it's not to a high level it might still be relevant. Having a degree in History for example tells employers gently caress all about your maths abilities and a lot of vacancies ask for people to be educated to standard grade level in maths and english.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 13:35
|
|
|
Zeppelin Insanity posted:Perhaps I am completely incorrect. I admittedly do not have data, it is simply an impression I get as a foreigner, and it's the same in my country. I know many people who scoff at paying jobs and look down on them while being unemployed. Well, you made a fairly provocative insult yourself. Yes, there will always be people who take advantage, but it is not even a sizeable minority, and it is pretty loving rude to imply unemployed people in this thread, and the whole country, are too superior to work. If you were unemployed for any period in the UK, you might discover that looking for work in areas 'beneath' your education or background is unavoidable. The problem is, said employers make the assumption that you will bugger off at the first opprtunity to greener pasture. Lets, face it, they are right. However, after being out of work for ages and applying everywhere, I am using my decade of experience in financial services and education in a minimum wage telesales job. Why? Because I have no choice, and am not too proud to do anything. I don't think this makes me atypical. So, yes, it was an insult, but not one as egregious as yours. Walk a mile in another man's shoes, etc
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 13:48
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:Well I suppose it's well-paid and prestigious compared to working in a McDonalds but comparable skills in the Civil Service will get you at best 80% of the wage you could get in the private sector, and while that's always been the case previously the job security and good pension was the upside, the Tories have torn that to shreds in the last 5 years (total pay freeze for 3 years, way-below-inflation raises since, ending final salary pensions, etc). The Fast Stream pays £25-27k in the first year, rising into the mid-40s after 4-6 years. For comparative purposes, the average graduate starting salary is £18-22k. Even if you restrict your focus to more prestigious employers, the average is only £29k. Also, a few years of below inflation pay rises do not preclude bigger raises in future, and while the current career-average defined benefit pension scheme is less generous than the old final salary setup it's still substantially nicer than the typical private sector defined contribution system.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 13:49
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:The Fast Stream pays £25-27k in the first year, rising into the mid-40s after 4-6 years. For comparative purposes, the average graduate starting salary is £18-22k. Even if you restrict your focus to more prestigious employers, the average is only £29k. Also, a few years of below inflation pay rises do not preclude bigger raises in future, and while the current career-average defined benefit pension scheme is less generous than the old final salary setup it's still substantially nicer than the typical private sector defined contribution system. If you consider where the people qualified to be in the fast stream could work, 40k in 5 years is laughably low. 40k is a second year analyst bonus at a good bank.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 14:04
|
|
|
Poison Jam posted:Is it safe for me to come back to the thread without wanting to put my fist through my monitor? No.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 14:04
|
|
|
Prince John posted:This isn't really true. The ONS produced this study as at 2013. Public sector workers are paid between 2.2 and 3.1% higher after adjusting for different jobs and personnel characteristics. Once you correct for organisation size, the pay is estimated at 1.3% and 2.4% lower than the private sector. Well admittedly I'm only going on personal experience of the Civil Service people I deal with, who get paid a ridiculously poor sum for their (mostly technical) abilities. I'd personally have to take at least a 25% pay cut were I to go into the public sector, and my pay's fairly low compared to what I could get in other sectors. I'd also be interested to see the war data on that - particularly as (again the sector I work in) a huge amount of public work is being done by contractors and consultants, most of them trained by HMG then moving to said consultancies and being paid a shitload more to do their old jobs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 14:06
|
|
|
hookerbot 5000 posted:That's a bit poo poo, I don't think that's true for the majority of people. who the gently caress asks for GCSE results when you're applying for a job? seriously, that's a loving joke / you must be going for some seriously lovely jobs. if I see a CV with gcse results in any way prominently highlighted I loving laugh and ignore it. if you're over 23 and this is important you need to re-evaluate your life. just loving lie about them if it's a problem. your school only keeps the records for like 6 years and as I said if you're applying for jobs where they honestly give a poo poo about the exams you took when you were sixteen then I feel bad for you son.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 14:09
|
|
|
Trickjaw posted:Well, you made a fairly provocative insult yourself. Yes, there will always be people who take advantage, but it is not even a sizeable minority, and it is pretty loving rude to imply unemployed people in this thread, and the whole country, are too superior to work. It is sad those who are doing well so readily buy into a just world fallacy. Heck not even that, a belief that those who are not doing well should be punished further for not accepting the lowliest station in life ASAP. The notion that people are to be criticised for not wanting to stack shelves in Poundland after years of hard work and financial outlay is disgusting. That, as you say, those who are forced to squandered their skills and hard work are often refused less well paying jobs just adds insult to injury. Incidentally 2010 Nobel prize for economics was awarded for a paper that showed unemployment safety nets that allowed people time to find a job they're well suited for is a net benefit to the economy even if they initially cost more than systems that force people to take any job ASAP.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 14:15
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:The Fast Stream pays £25-27k in the first year, rising into the mid-40s after 4-6 years. For comparative purposes, the average graduate starting salary is £18-22k. Even if you restrict your focus to more prestigious employers, the average is only £29k. Also, a few years of below inflation pay rises do not preclude bigger raises in future, and while the current career-average defined benefit pension scheme is less generous than the old final salary setup it's still substantially nicer than the typical private sector defined contribution system. I very much doubt that as it stands now, that civil service annual pay increases will rise past the rate of inflation. The pay spines have been removed and won't be coming back - short of that there are no systems in place for performance pay rises - performance pay comes in the form of bonuses (which was pegged at approx £600 this year, so hardly banker money). Fast Stream is a management program rather than a graduate program. Although recruiting is basically closed for the most part for university leavers, in a perfect world most entering the civil service would be entering as a Executive Officer with no real career progression, or at least not one better than the private sector. Obviously I'm talking about Whitehall/National civil service (however you want to label it) - rather than the public sector as a whole. I found in my tour around the private sector, that a lot of professional employers are offering pensions either in line with or better than the civil service now, although that is purely anecdotal and probably more to do with the sector rather than a larger trend. e: Additionally specialists in the civil service, particularly IT, make so little compared to the private sector that its almost funny. A department I work with hemorrhages so many people the second they're trained that the office is almost always empty. Red7 fucked around with this message at 14:18 on Aug 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 14:15
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:who the gently caress asks for GCSE results when you're applying for a job? seriously, that's a loving joke / you must be going for some seriously lovely jobs. Someone asked why do people ask for GCSE's, I said why I thought they would. It's not a problem or something I care about (because I have okay standard grade results and expect I'll only ever be applying for what you would class as lovely jobs anyway).
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 14:16
|
|
|
Trickjaw posted:Well, you made a fairly provocative insult yourself. Yes, there will always be people who take advantage, but it is not even a sizeable minority, and it is pretty loving rude to imply unemployed people in this thread, and the whole country, are too superior to work. I apologise. It was a sweeping generalisation that was uncalled for. You're right. I just hate the idea of "dem immigrants stealing our jobs" because it's used so often, and is quite effective. Very touchy subject you might imagine. I still think there is a certain amount of people like that, and no, I do not consider it "taking advantage", nor do I think the system is in any way to blame and nor do I think there are enough people like that to put any significant strain on it. I was extrapolating from my own experience, in my country that attitude is quite common. I know plenty of people like that. I assumed it was largely the same in Britain, which it may very well not be. ReV VAdAUL posted:It is sad those who are doing well so readily buy into a just world fallacy. Heck not even that, a belief that those who are not doing well should be punished further for not accepting the lowliest station in life ASAP. I think this is an important part of the argument. You assume - and it is a reasonable assumption because looking back on it I accidentally used some rhetoric that could be interpreted this way - that I think those people should take any job they can find, or that they are to blame, or anything like that. I do not think that at all. My point was that there are far fewer people being pushed out of low-skilled jobs by immigration than xenophobes like to think, because most of the jobs many immigrants (obviously not all) would get are those higher skilled people would not want to take - hell, I'm one of those people. I don't think that's a bad thing, my argument was anti-anti immigration, not anti-unemployment support. I hope that clears things up. JFairfax posted:who the gently caress asks for GCSE results when you're applying for a job? seriously, that's a loving joke / you must be going for some seriously lovely jobs. I'm a fresh graduate with no work experience. I apply mostly to graduate schemes, and so far every single one in the UK asked for my GCSE results, from retail to consultancy to banks. Zeppelin Insanity fucked around with this message at 14:36 on Aug 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 14:24
|
|
|
Most anti-immigration rhetoric is directed at low-skilled migrants with specific exemptions for skilled labourers that the country might need (e.g. poaching fully trained doctors and nurses from other countries). Even if you argue that immigration as a whole is a net benefit economically, they will just say that it would be even more economically beneficial if we cut out the migrants who weren't "pulling their weight" (i.e. poor people).
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 14:28
|
|
|
In an ideal world, I think people not taking jobs that they are overqualified for should be a commendable thing, but that's sort of reliant on their being a very strong social security net. As it currently stands, desperation and ever increasing attacks on what pitiful measures we have to stop people dying in gutters is making that less of a reality. Being on benefits sucks, even a lovely job is better than being on them (provided it's not zero hour, in which case you would probably be better off being on the dole, and I wouldn't blame you in the slightest)
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 14:32
|
|
|
Zeppelin Insanity posted:I apologise. It was a sweeping generalisation that was uncalled for. You're right. I just hate the idea of "dem immigrants stealing our jobs" because it's used so often, and is quite effective. Very touchy subject you might imagine. We're cool. I also don't like the immigrant polemic, and I hear it every day. I have lived with Poles, Romanians, Spaniards, Kenyans, and more, and they all came here to work, and work bloody hard, in jobs of varying prestige. So, I hate hearing about the universal belief that there is an insidious tide of foreigners taking our jobs and benefits. I think the essential point I would make is one you would agree with; Generalising any section of society is wrong, and potentially dangerous. Doesn't matter if its immigrants, dole scum, or brown people. Its an easy rabble rouser for the papers, but it is never indicative of the reality. As far as taking any job going, I took my current one solely because it is more cash than JSA (I am worse off losing housing benefit, though) and it gives me something to do apart from watching day time TV. Also, its a simple fact that having anything on a CV is better than a black hole when you are looking for your next step. I don't mind what I do (within reason, I wouldn't run for election as a tory MP)and the vast majority of non working indigenous people here I have met would think the same. e: Ddraig, I'm on zero hours, but it was that or nothing. Fortunatley, I'm pretty good at what I do, so I always get the hours, if no sick or holiday pay or rights of any kind :/ Trickjaw fucked around with this message at 14:51 on Aug 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 14:49
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:who the gently caress asks for GCSE results when you're applying for a job? seriously, that's a loving joke / you must be going for some seriously lovely jobs. Network Rail apprenticeships  It's true they're primarily aimed at college leavers, but they are open to older people as well, and a good thing too with the cost of domestic education right now. JFairfax posted:if you're applying for jobs where they honestly give a poo poo about the exams you took when you were sixteen then I feel bad for you son. Your pity is noted and appreciated, please consider augmenting it by campaigning for policy changes that will make adult [re]training a thing it is actually plausible for non-rich people to do.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 14:56
|
|
|
Malcolm XML posted:If you consider where the people qualified to be in the fast stream could work, 40k in 5 years is laughably low. 40k is a second year analyst bonus at a good bank. Yeah, I specifically said it couldn't compare to banking or consultancy in terms of pay although it has much less crazy working hours. However, it's clearly better than most "graduate" jobs (£18-22k starting salary lol nope) and someone on £40k+ in their mid/late twenties is well ahead of both the national and London averages at the very least. Anyway, that's probably enough of a derail about the fast stream's merits or lack thereof.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 15:12
|
|
|
DashingGentleman posted:(Protip: tendency to misplace the article is common tell-tale sign of Polish person. Also, an overuse, of commas. Not saying Zepp does this, just sayin'.) This happens in all the essays I've proofread for Lithuanians, Russians and Romanians as well. Must be a Baltoslavic language trait.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 15:51
|
|
|
ReV VAdAUL posted:Incidentally 2010 Nobel prize for economics was awarded for a paper that showed unemployment safety nets that allowed people time to find a job they're well suited for is a net benefit to the economy even if they initially cost more than systems that force people to take any job ASAP. Who should I vote for if I want a party that will run with evidence-based policies in this area? Is there literally nobody?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 16:04
|
|
|
EvilGenius posted:loving hell, it's simplistic, but I learned that the rate of native population growth in Britain is slowing, and needs immigration to sustain economic growth. Immigrants are a good economic prospect because the state, and members of the state don't have to pay to raise them through childhood. I have no problem with immigration, but any immigration or population argument that relies on the worship of growth over and above distribution of wealth is a bad one. Whose economic growth has been sustained the most over the past 5 years?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 16:17
|
|
|
Trickjaw posted:I think the essential point I would make is one you would agree with; Generalising any section of society is wrong, and potentially dangerous. Doesn't matter if its immigrants, dole scum, or brown people. Its an easy rabble rouser for the papers, but it is never indicative of the reality. What about the bourgeoisie?  In general I agree. It's definitely an easy rabble rouser, and a slippery slope. I've just had a lesson in how slippery. I've mistakenly used some language that is often used to promote views I despise, and everyone very reasonably assumed those were the views I had. It was actually quite shocking to me. It did not occur to me how close I got to a certain kind of rhetoric.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 16:42
|
|
|
Prince John posted:Who should I vote for if I want a party that will run with evidence-based policies in this area? Is there literally nobody? The Greens support a citizen's income. That would probably be even better given it would also enable people to do stuff they're good at and that benefits the economy but doesn't provide a livelihood. There's a big question over whether it could work however. All other parties and the majority of the public support as miserly unemployment support as possible.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
Darth Walrus posted:I think it would have been nice if he'd gone out of his way a bit more to make that distinction himself, though, instead of tacitly conflating them further with that 'restricting is not hating' line. Right, so in this case he is a terrible racist. Doesn't stop it being silly to conflate the two as a matter of course though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 16:54
|
|
|
ReV VAdAUL posted:All other parties and the majority of the public support as miserly unemployment support as possible. You still haven't posted your response to my last question to you in this thread (despite others asking you to do the same too). Here you are again though, complaining that the UK government and the people (influenced by the UK government and crappy, biased media) are entrenched in destructive tendencies with no clear way to overcome it. edit (because you've had about 2 days to post it here and haven't bothered): ReV VAdAUL (in another thread that-no one here reads) posted:From the UK thread, it seemed best to respond here: Kin fucked around with this message at 17:03 on Aug 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 16:58
|
|
|
People want to see your GCSE results because lots of jobs now have requirements for new hires to have Level 1/2 Literacy/Numeracy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 17:07
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:who the gently caress asks for GCSE results when you're applying for a job? seriously, that's a loving joke / you must be going for some seriously lovely jobs. Renaissance Robot posted:Network Rail apprenticeships Ddraig posted:In an ideal world, I think people not taking jobs that they are overqualified for should be a commendable thing, but that's sort of reliant on their being a very strong social security net. I've just finished a summer job as a porter for North Bristol NHS Trust. They took on about 20 of us to do cleaning/moving jobs that really don't require any literacy or maths skills, but they specified GCSE maths and English as desirable criteria when they advertised the job. On the first day every one of us handed over GCSE certificates for inspection. Last summer I worked for an exam board and they specified 5 GCSE passes as essential and A-levels as desirable. They took on 15 of us and we all had A-levels - a few were graduates who had not been able to get permanent jobs. Have a look at the job cards in a job centre and you will see that GCSE passes in at least maths and English are almost always asked for. I really dread to think of what it must be like for someone who for whatever reason doesn't have GCSEs to try to get any kind of job given how choosy my employers have been about who they took on as temporary dogsbodies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 17:08
|
|
|
Kerbtree posted:People want to see your GCSE results because lots of jobs now have requirements for new hires to have Level 1/2 Literacy/Numeracy. I always just factored it down to interviewers trying to find something else to help differentiate candidates. Like has person A been pretty much top notch throughout their entire life, while person B was great in highschool but started slacking off in uni, etc. It might also be a way to determine someone's interests. Like i took higher geography, chemistry and Music, but didn't do any of that in Uni so my CV doesn't reflect that. That being said, i don't think a good CV should list your hobbies and interests. It should have your most recent highest level of education/training, a brief section on key responsibilities of your last few jobs and a section that summarises the abilities/skills you have and maybe how you picked those up (which is much easier to do once you're in a full time non service industry/retail job that trains you in things). Stuff like personality/hobbies/interests, etc should come out during interviews and whatnot instead of being a prerequisite for getting through the front door in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 17:16
|
|
|
Re poors who just can't be bothered to work and clearly brought it on themselves: Rickets is making a comeback. (Ignore the crazy part of the article that calls gout a deficiency disease.]
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 17:21
|
|
|
Kin posted:You still haven't posted your response to my last question to you in this thread (despite others asking you to do the same too). Scottish Nationalist posters declared their independence from the UK thread, they created a place where they could focus on Scottish issues and set their own agenda. Sadly that independence attempt failed, indeed several Nationalist posters, including yourself, admitted it has turned to poo poo, and now you are desperately trying to reintegrate Scottish nationalist issues into the functioning UK thread. Alas, bold moves for independence can't easily be reverted. Posts about Scottish independence no longer belong here.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 17:41
|
|
|
What's the over/under on pellagra making a comeback? 18 months?  If anyone wanted more 'human' proof about how welfare/citizens income/national living wage have positive economic multipliers both instantly and further down the line, it's right here. (Until some  blames it on the widescreen TVs)
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 17:42
|
|
|
Zeppelin Insanity posted:I'm as leftist as they come. Some of the things you have said contradict this belief.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 17:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 06:38 |
|
|
I got a tuition gig on the back of an A* in GCSE English Literature that I left on my CV even though I went on to specialise in maths and science at A-Level and beyond. My careers advisor pretty much went "my son and his friend need help with their Eng Lit, what should I do, oh wait didn't Paul mention on his CV that..." Perhaps fortunately*, when they found out that maths was my real specialism, the kids asked if I could tutor them in that too since they enjoyed maths more and wanted to do the Intermediate Maths Challenge and GCSE Additional Maths. * since I understand you shouldn't really tutor a course unless you've been educated to the level above it, and I didn't take A-Level Eng Lit. And yeah, I was a rather more mixed Eng Lit tutor than I was a maths one. Still, hope I was still helpful with Eng Lit .
Paul.Power fucked around with this message at 17:48 on Aug 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 17:46
|
|
