Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Science and Technology => Topic started by: jeremyp on July 13, 2016, 12:39:21 PM
-
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/jul/12/its-not-business-as-usual-until-brexit-uk-scientists-are-already-feeling-the-effects?CMP=twt_gu
British science is already suffering thanks to those twats.
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/36774609/the-new-pm-has-a-lot-on-her-plate-on-day-one-in-the-job
I'm sure she'll get round to it.
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/36774609/the-new-pm-has-a-lot-on-her-plate-on-day-one-in-the-job
I'm sure she'll get round to it.
On what information do you base that possibility? Disruption caused by lack of funding and co-operation in the world of Science is one of those things that I'll bet a very large number of Brexiters didn't even consider.
-
On what information do you base that possibility? Disruption caused by lack of funding and co-operation in the world of Science is one of those things that I'll bet a very large number of Brexiters didn't even consider.
Not ALL scientists are negative, Susan.
http://scientistsforbritain.uk/wordpress/
-
MATT RIDLEY: THE SCIENTIFIC CASE FOR BREXIT
On the 3rd May, the Royal Society hosted a discussion on the UK’s scientific relationship with EU science programmes, and on what the future might hold for a politically independent UK. During the discussion, Viscount Ridley made a strong, positive and internationalist case for a ‘Leave’ vote at the forthcoming EU referendum, which you can listen to here:
http://scientistsforbritain.uk/wordpress/?p=218
-
According to him it is harder for scientists from outside the EU to come here because they can't get a visa.
http://scientistsforbritain.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Viscount_Ridley_Transcript.pdf
Some of his points are interesting.
Lots of non EU countries get funding anyway.
-
I think Prof. D. was pointing this out a while ago, that British scientists would be off-loaded from research consortia.
I notice also that energy companies are getting rid of their cheapest deals, because of falling pound.
-
This is a research scientist POV
http://scientistsforbritain.uk/wordpress/?p=259
Now put away the doom and gloom. ???
-
Thanks Pollyanna ! ::)
Oh wait .. weren't we going to spend all those hundreds of millions a week on NHS services? Maybe in his research into biomolecular mass spectrometry he has found a way of getting something for nothing?
-
According to him it is harder for scientists from outside the EU to come here because they can't get a visa.
I don't think you understand about this Brexit thing. They aren't planning to make it easier for for non EU people to get in, but to make it harder for EU people to get in. The impacts science in two ways:
1. we lose a source of scientists from the EU
2. Our scientists lose an opportunity to go to the EU.
Also there's the funding. You could argue that EU funding may be replaced by UK funding, but we really don't know that. EU funds weren't affected by our austerity measures, but you can bet that purported future UK funding will be during the coming recession.
http://scientistsforbritain.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Viscount_Ridley_Transcript.pdf
Some of his points are interesting.
Lots of non EU countries get funding anyway.
Don't show that to Jack Knave. He thinks a Norway deal doesn't count as Brexit.
In any case, it doesn't matter what Viscount Ridley thinks or one rabidly anti-EU nutter who also does science. British science is already being damaged by Brexit.
-
Jeremy
Regardless of the rights and wrongs.
Brexit is the new reality.
Isn't it time you stopped being so violently negative, depressing and inciting others to be so to.
Learn to deal with reality, you are stating to sound like (for different reasons) Hope, Sass, Spud, Etc.
-
Jeremy
Regardless of the rights and wrongs.
Brexit is the new reality.
Isn't it time you stopped being so violently negative, depressing and inciting others to be so to.
Learn to deal neither reality, you are stating to sound like (for different reasons) Hope, Sass, Spud, Etc. the
It's not actually a reality yet.
-
Jeremy
Regardless of the rights and wrongs.
Brexit is the new reality.
Isn't it time you stopped being so violently negative, depressing and inciting others to be so to.
Just because there's been a vote doesn't mean reality has changed. It doesn't mean that Brexit is magically a good idea. It's still shit and I'll continue to point out the many ways in which it is shit.
-
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/jul/12/its-not-business-as-usual-until-brexit-uk-scientists-are-already-feeling-the-effects?CMP=twt_gu
British science is already suffering thanks to those twats.
Talk about being conned. Load of rubbish we don't need Europe for Science.
America and England have enough top scientist and their own studies to get one with.
Jeremyp grow up and face it. We are out of EUROPE thank God. And all the excuses are
just that... The people have decided and you have to be gracious about the outcome...
-
Talk about being conned. Load of rubbish we don't need Europe for Science.
Yes, Brexit voters have been conned. And we do need Europe for science. The EU gives us huge quantities of investment for science and, probably more importantly, provides opportunities for British scientists to go to Europe and vice versa.
America and England have enough top scientist and their own studies to get one with.
Huh? Could you rewrite that in English please?
Are you suggesting that the USA will give us the funds we no longer get from Europe?
Jeremyp grow up and face it. We are out of EUROPE thank God.
You're claiming this is all God's fault? He's even worse than I thought.
The people have decided and you have to be gracious about the outcome...
No I don't. The people voted for an insular inward looking country with no vision. What has happened makes me really angry and I will not be shut down by idiot Little Englanders like you. I will continue posting the worst consequences of Brexit to remind the Little Englanders of what utter twats they have been.
-
Especiallyas I still haven't heard one good reason to come out of the EU.
-
Dear Forum,
Talking of science! here's a thought, scrap Trident and build our own CERN at Faslane :o
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Forum,
Talking of science! here's a thought, scrap Trident and build our own CERN at Faslane :o
Gonnagle.
What's the point if we are not going to let the scientists in to use it?
-
Dear Jeremyp,
But it would be ours :o that's what all this Brexit stuff is about, me me me, us against Johnny foreigner, the brexiteer is fed up with watching foreigners using our NHS, taking our housing, stealing our jobs.
Gonnagle.
-
On the subject of Science, what do people here think of Justine Greening as Education Secretary - which appears to cover Science too. The main thing I hope for is that she is an atheist, since those with a belief in a supernatural, imaginary friend should not be planning the scientific curriculum of schools or believe that a God exists.
I realise, sadly, that the chances of an openly atheist PM is highly unlikely during my life.
ETA That's not quite what I meant. It would be better to say that Science curriculums should not ever be allowed to teach anything that cannot be examined by the scientific method.
-
On the subject of Science, what do people here think of Justine Greening as Education Secretary - which appears to cover Science too. The main thing I hope for is that she is an atheist, since those with a belief in a supernatural, imaginary friend should not be planning the scientific curriculum of schools or believe that a God exists.
I realise, sadly, that the chances of an openly atheist PM is highly unlikely during my life.
ETA That's not quite what I meant. It would be better to say that Science curriculums should not ever be allowed to teach anything that cannot be examined by the scientific method.
I think it was those with a religious background and religion themselves are the people who developed the science curriculum.
Atheism can never be examined using the scientific method so, given that what is the warrant of having an atheist doing the science curriculum?
-
Yes, Brexit voters have been conned. And we do need Europe for science. The EU gives us huge quantities of investment for science and, probably more importantly, provides opportunities for British scientists to go to Europe and vice versa.
In your dreams... What sciences are they providing funding for that we don't already have funding for here?
Huh? Could you rewrite that in English please?
Are you suggesting that the USA will give us the funds we no longer get from Europe?
You mean they give us our own money back, how kind...NOT.
If we are not paying them 35 billion we can afford to give it to ourselves.
You're claiming this is all God's fault? He's even worse than I thought.
Any program that makes the poor poorer and the oppresses them and the disabled is NOT going to succeed. Charity begins at home. If they could not take of our own service men putting them on the street or the poorer in our society then NO we should not be bailing out others or bringing immigrants here.
They reaped what they sowed.
No I don't. The people voted for an insular inward looking country with no vision. What has happened makes me really angry and I will not be shut down by idiot Little Englanders like you. I will continue posting the worst consequences of Brexit to remind the Little Englanders of what utter twats they have been.
Sore losers people like you thinking that they could treat the poorer in our societies like sh*t and be the big I am to the rest of the world. This Country lost it's greatness when it prostituted us out to the EU and made it's people poorer to do so.
If you don't like the Country then leave...
No consequences we British are made of stern stuff, Hitler couldn't wear us down and neither can you. You see we are not cowards we can face anything with our God and come out the other side. All the EU has done has ruined other countries and caused them to require bailing out. Britiain is British and we do not require the EU to survive. As an Island with the help of God we have done that pretty much always survived and we don't give in to bullies and idiots who when democracy has ruled become cry babies and stamp their feet.
-
Dear Jeremyp,
But it would be ours :o that's what all this Brexit stuff is about, me me me, us against Johnny foreigner, the brexiteer is fed up with watching foreigners using our NHS, taking our housing, stealing our jobs.
Gonnagle.
It would have to be bigger than the LHC or what's the point?
-
In your dreams... What sciences are they providing funding for that we don't already have funding for here?
You mean they give us our own money back, how kind...NOT.
If we are not paying them 35 billion we can afford to give it to ourselves.
Any program that makes the poor poorer and the oppresses them and the disabled is NOT going to succeed. Charity begins at home. If they could not take of our own service men putting them on the street or the poorer in our society then NO we should not be bailing out others or bringing immigrants here.
They reaped what they sowed.
Sore losers people like you thinking that they could treat the poorer in our societies like sh*t and be the big I am to the rest of the world. This Country lost it's greatness when it prostituted us out to the EU and made it's people poorer to do so.
If you don't like the Country then leave...
No consequences we British are made of stern stuff, Hitler couldn't wear us down and neither can you. You see we are not cowards we can face anything with our God and come out the other side. All the EU has done has ruined other countries and caused them to require bailing out. Britiain is British and we do not require the EU to survive. As an Island with the help of God we have done that pretty much always survived and we don't give in to bullies and idiots who when democracy has ruled become cry babies and stamp their feet.
Hitler would have worn us down if it wasn't for the most powerful country coming to our aid.
-
I think it was those with a religious background and religion themselves are the people who developed the science curriculum.
That's not the point. Whether those who wrote the curriculum werereligious or not and whether those who made the scientific break-throughs of the 16th and 17th centuries, etc believed in god or not - all that does not alter the fact that today we have a wealth of information, facts and figures, space stations, space probes finding their precise destinations after many years of travel, an increasingly reliable knowledge of weather patterns and so on, none of which owes anything to the humanly imagined, supernatural idea usually named God which is supposed to be *out there* somewhere. The idea is so bizarre actually that it is astonishing that it is not diminishing far, far more quickly than it is.
Atheism can never be examined using the scientific method so, given that what is the warrant of having an atheist doing the science curriculum?
At least a Science curriculum with the person who takes final respponsibility for it being an atheist will mean that no god idea or influence will be even hinted at anywhere in any Science curriculum.
:P
-
In your dreams...
It's a matter of fact.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/jun/24/brexit-big-blow-to-uk-science-say-top-british-scientists
You mean they give us our own money back, how kind...NOT.
Actually, we get more than our "fair" share of science funding from the EU.
If we are not paying them 35 billion we can afford to give it to ourselves.
Where did you get that figure of 35 billion from?
Any program that makes the poor poorer and the oppresses them and the disabled is NOT going to succeed. Charity begins at home. If they could not take of our own service men putting them on the street or the poorer in our society then NO we should not be bailing out others or bringing immigrants here.
They reaped what they sowed.
I don't know why you think a poor Polish person is worth less than a poor Englishman, unless it is because you are racist.
Sore losers people like you thinking that they could treat the poorer in our societies like sh*t
Actually it's a case of wanting to help poor people in more than just England. The EU is about improving the lot of everybody in its member states.
Your lack of vision is utterly depressing.
This Country lost it's greatness when it prostituted us out to the EU and made it's people poorer to do so.
Now you are delusional. This country lost its greatness through having to prosecute two catastrophic and extremely costly (in many ways) wars with other countries in Europe. The EU helps to stop that from ever happening again.
You need to read your 20th century history.
If you don't like the Country then leave...
Don't think it hasn't crossed my mind. Right now it seems there are too many small minded xenophobic Little Englanders here for it to be a pleasant place to live.
No consequences we British are made of stern stuff, Hitler couldn't wear us down
He did wear us down. Do some research into the state of the country when the War finished. Google "Marshall plan" if you want to see how not worn down we were.
All the EU has done has ruined other countries and caused them to require bailing out. Britiain is British and we do not require the EU to survive. As an Island with the help of God we have done that pretty much always survived and we don't give in to bullies and idiots who when democracy has ruled become cry babies and stamp their feet.
You're an ignorant know nothing and you are beneath contempt. Is it cowardly to embrace our European neighbours and look to the future or to cower on our little island behind our fortified borders. You Leavers have ruined this country and I'm not going to stop saying it just because you find the truth unpalatable.
-
::)
No one has ruined the country ::)
-
::)
No one has ruined the country ::)
The Brexiters have.
-
The Brexiters have.
No they haven't
-
Hitler would have worn us down if it wasn't for the most powerful country coming to our aid.
My Great Uncle Joe was a Desert Rat an ORIGINAL every time they conquered a place and move on leaving it in the hands of the Americans they had to turn back to retrieve it again as the that powerful country could not hold onto it.
The Americans did not come into the war to aid us, they came in because they came under attack in 1941 December 7th when the japs bombed Pearl Harbour. Churchill had tried to convince Roosevelt to enter the war but they did not enter WW2 till they themselves came under attack.
Men don't need other countries to win wars when God is on their side. Even Churchill realised that all he had learned made no sense till God brought him to lead this Country in War. Then he knew what everything he had learned was for.
You need the eyes of faith to understand Gods plans in the lives of others.
America soon entered the war when they realised no one is safe no matter where they live when there is powers willing to attack in secret and underhandedly.
-
No they haven't
Open your eyes.
-
My Great Uncle Joe was a Desert Rat an ORIGINAL every time they conquered a place and move on leaving it in the hands of the Americans they had to turn back to retrieve it again as the that powerful country could not hold onto it.
That's utter nonsense. Read some history of the North Africa campaign.
The Americans did not come into the war to aid us, they came in because they came under attack in 1941 December 7th when the japs bombed Pearl Harbour. Churchill had tried to convince Roosevelt to enter the war but they did not enter WW2 till they themselves came under attack.
It doesn't matter why they came into the War. The fact is they did and we couldn't have won without them and it still left us hopelessly bankrupt and in need of US aide afterwards.
Men don't need other countries to win wars when God is on their side. Even Churchill realised that all he had learned made no sense till God brought him to lead this Country in War. Then he knew what everything he had learned was for.
What a load of tosh.
-
Open your eyes.
My eyes are open :)
-
My Great Uncle Joe was a Desert Rat an ORIGINAL every time they conquered a place and move on leaving it in the hands of the Americans they had to turn back to retrieve it again as the that powerful country could not hold onto it.
The Americans did not come into the war to aid us, they came in because they came under attack in 1941 December 7th when the japs bombed Pearl Harbour. Churchill had tried to convince Roosevelt to enter the war but they did not enter WW2 till they themselves came under attack.
Men don't need other countries to win wars when God is on their side. Even Churchill realised that all he had learned made no sense till God brought him to lead this Country in War. Then he knew what everything he had learned was for.
You need the eyes of faith to understand Gods plans in the lives of others.
America soon entered the war when they realised no one is safe no matter where they live when there is powers willing to attack in secret and underhandedly.
Sassy
But was it specifically the Christian God ?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11314580/Sir-Winston-Churchill-s-family-feared-he-might-convert-to-Islam.html
:o
-
My eyes are open :)
And you can't see the chaos going on?
Read this to give you some idea of the complexities of what must happen next
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jul/14/whats-the-best-brexit-theresa-may-could-get-for-britain
We are going to spend the next twenty years sorting this mess out. That's a lot of energy that could have been directed to positive outward looking forward thinking ideas. Instead we need to find ways of stopping other EU countries from pillaging us of our industry and services whilst also acquiescing to the demands of our own xenophobes.
-
On the PM programme today there were scientists already noticing problems with funding.
-
from the NYT : England’s Last Gasp of Empire :
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/13/opinion/englands-last-gasp-of-empire.html
-
Yes, a very interesting article.
-
On the subject of Science, what do people here think of Justine Greening as Education Secretary - which appears to cover Science too.
No that's wrong - the universities and science minister's remit (Boris' brother) is split between two departments - the education part of his remit in the Department of Education (under Greening) but the research and science part is under Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy under Greg Clark.
-
In your dreams... What sciences are they providing funding for that we don't already have funding for here?
Any science where the questions to be answered require teams of researchers that are defined by the quality of those people rather than where they live.
The UK science funding only funds scientists in UK institutions so you are very limited in the teams you can put together. EU funding has allowed teams of researchers to be put together that include the top talents from pretty well anywhere in Europe.
-
According to him it is harder for scientists from outside the EU to come here because they can't get a visa.
He is, of course, correct that scientists from outside the EU need a visa, while those in the EU don't.
But Brexit won't stop those from outside the EU still requiring a visa, but may well require those from inside the EU to get one too.
-
Not ALL scientists are negative, Susan.
http://scientistsforbritain.uk/wordpress/
You will always find some who disagree with any position even if they are a tiny, tiny minority. So you will find some scientists that deny climate change is occurring, but the vast, vast majority believe it is.
So on Brexit, well guess what I spend my life in the company of research scientists, based in the EU, other EU countries and across the world.
I cannot think of a single scientist I know who has expressed anything other than negative views on brexit and its effects on science. Sure many are putting on a brave face and hoping that the ultimate settlement will allow us to retain the ability to be funded throughout the EU schemes, but the scientific community is, without doubt, deeply concerned about the future of research funding for science in the UK, and in turn concerned about the standing of the UK amongst the scientific community, specifically because to do internationally leading scientific research you need funding, and in many cases lots of funding.
-
According to him it is harder for scientists from outside the EU to come here because they can't get a visa.
http://scientistsforbritain.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Viscount_Ridley_Transcript.pdf
Some of his points are interesting.
Lots of non EU countries get funding anyway.
And why should his views be considered to be authoritative on the effects of brexit on scientific research.
You do understand that he isn't a research scientist, don't you.
-
I thought he was a journalist who has published in the 'pop' science genre. Of course he can make comments based on his observations as we all can but he is hardly an expert.
-
I thought he was a journalist who has published in the 'pop' science genre. Of course he can make comments based on his observations as we all can but he is hardly an expert.
Exactly right. He isn't a research scientist, so can't be considered to be an expert.
-
That's utter nonsense. Read some history of the North Africa campaign.
It doesn't matter why they came into the War. The fact is they did and we couldn't have won without them and it still left us hopelessly bankrupt and in need of US aide afterwards.
What a load of tosh.
The truth is that my great uncle was an original Desert Rat.
The other fact is that the reason they came into the war did matter.
Though financially we were left in debt to the USA the truth does matter and it does not change anything I said.
In truth it is a fact that GOD used this country to bring the Jews back to Israel and to win the war against a tyrant. Without the faith element it still does not change the facts that what I said is true.
-
The truth is that my great uncle was an original Desert Rat.
So what?
The USA were not involved in the North Africa campaign until Operation Torch at the end of 1942 and it was all over by May 1943 largely because we had the help of the Americans.
Though financially we were left in debt to the USA the truth does matter and it does not change anything I said.
Britain was utterly exhausted at the end of the war.
In truth it is a fact that GOD used this country to bring the Jews back to Israel
Does he think that is actually going well? If it was God's idea to create the modern state of Israel, he needs to keep out of world politics.
and to win the war against a tyrant. Without the faith element it still does not change the facts that what I said is true.
The Second World War was one by human beings, attributing any part of it to God is degrading to all the people who sacrificed so much to the cause.
Furthermore, the outcome of the war was that the atheist Soviet Union gained control of a large part of Europe, is that what God wanted?
-
British science is already suffering thanks to those twats.
This sort of drivel isn't going to change anyone's mind.
-
This sort of drivel isn't going to change anyone's mind.
I agree...
-
This sort of drivel isn't going to change anyone's mind.
It's a fact. Try reading the news.
-
This sort of drivel isn't going to change anyone's mind.
Jeremy is absolutely correct that the brexit vote is already having a negative impact on scientific research in the UK, it isn't drivel.
Now I don't know what you do Jakswan, but I am a research scientist and in a senior position within a research intensive university so part of my role is providing strategic management of the research activities. So I know what I'm talking about.
So since the brexit vote there have been a significant number of instances where researchers in my institution have found they are no longer welcome in developing consortiums that are aiming at applying for EU funding in the newer future. We are being excluded, and you can understand why. If you are putting together a consortium and one partner may no longer be eligible for the funding then that is a big risk - if they cannot participate then the ability of the overall consortium to deliver is compromised.
Actually I have been asked, formally to keep a dossier of such occurrences, with the information to be submitted to the minister for universities and science.
Brexit has also had a chilling effect on recruitment and retention. Top scientists are often more than happy to relocate internationally to the best place to support their research ambitions. Although we haven't lost anyone yet I am aware of colleagues who are reactively looking to relocate into the remaining EU. Also in interviews earlier this week the issue of brexit was brought up by all the candidates as an issue of importance in their decision as to whether to take a position in the UK or elsewhere.
-
Jeremy is absolutely correct that the brexit vote is already having a negative impact on scientific research in the UK, it isn't drivel.
Now I don't know what you do Jakswan, but I am a research scientist and in a senior position within a research intensive university so part of my role is providing strategic management of the research activities. So I know what I'm talking about.
So since the brexit vote there have been a significant number of instances where researchers in my institution have found they are no longer welcome in developing consortiums that are aiming at applying for EU funding in the newer future. We are being excluded, and you can understand why. If you are putting together a consortium and one partner may no longer be eligible for the funding then that is a big risk - if they cannot participate then the ability of the overall consortium to deliver is compromised.
Actually I have been asked, formally to keep a dossier of such occurrences, with the information to be submitted to the minister for universities and science.
Brexit has also had a chilling effect on recruitment and retention. Top scientists are often more than happy to relocate internationally to the best place to support their research ambitions. Although we haven't lost anyone yet I am aware of colleagues who are reactively looking to relocate into the remaining EU. Also in interviews earlier this week the issue of brexit was brought up by all the candidates as an issue of importance in their decision as to whether to take a position in the UK or elsewhere.
Yes and your post is rational well thought out and would influence my view, calling people twats as per Jeremy wouldn't.
I don't work in that field, the field i do work in, furniture retail stands to gain, but let's not do the debate again it in the past now.
-
Dear Prof,
That is a very chilling post, what you are describing is a brain drain, wonder what kind of sticking plaster the Tories will come up for this one.
It does my wee British/Scottish/Glaswegian heart the power of good when I read about all the advances coming out of our Universities and research institutes, will that now become a thing of the past, never mind we have Mr Carney's magical 250 billion! but no, wait, that is for the banks, the very people Jack Knave keeps complaining about :(
Gonnagle.
-
Yes and your post is rational well thought out and would influence my view, calling people twats as per Jeremy wouldn't.
It's not the first time the Prof has posted on the subject. Unlike the Leavers I read what he wrote and what scientists have been saying in the media. Do you deny that this is a serious problem?
I don't work in that field, the field i do work in, furniture retail stands to gain, but let's not do the debate again it in the past now.
No, let's do the debate. Tell me how you think that the furniture retail industry is going to gain from Brexit. Seriously, we could do with some good news.
-
Yes and your post is rational well thought out and would influence my view, calling people twats as per Jeremy wouldn't.
I'm glad that you accept my inside knowledge on this as being more authoritative than most.
I don't work in that field, the field i do work in, furniture retail stands to gain, but let's not do the debate again it in the past now.
In what way would furniture retail gain?
Aren't you importing products to then sell to the public - won't the drop in the rate of sterling make your product range more expensive and therefore require you either to pass on that increase in price to customers (who may therefore choose not to buy) or cut margins therefore reducing profitability or require efficiency savings.
Also surely a sector such as furniture retailing must be rather susceptible to the broader health of the economy - sure we all need chairs, beds, tables etc, but when times are tough we may choose not to replace but to allow existing furniture to last a little bit longer.
Also isn't your sector fairly linked to the housing market - people move house, particularly to a bigger place and they also buy new furniture. If the housing markets become suppressed, with less transactions, less new builds (we are already seeing signs of this) there will be less people moving and deciding that their old sofa just won't do in their new place.
Now I'm not an expert, but as I've give a detailed expert view on why brexit has already been negative for scientific research it would be good for you to explain why it will be positive for furniture retailing as I genuinely can't see why it would be, but presumably you can provide an explanation.
-
Dear Prof,
That is a very chilling post, what you are describing is a brain drain, wonder what kind of sticking plaster the Tories will come up for this one.
Indeed it is.
A particular concern of mine is that I have 3 members of my staff awaiting the outcome of major prestigious personal research funding from the EU - in total worth about Euro4.5 million. The three researchers are Chinese (worked in France before coming to the UK), Turkish (having worked previously in the Netherlands) and Italian. So all are happy to move across borders to support their research.
Now currently they should be able to hold those grants in the UK, but the uncertainty is a real problem. Universities are extremely skilled at poaching the best people, particularly those with sufficient external funding to make them effectively 'free' to their university for the foreseeable future (in this case each grant is 5 years).
So without doubt there will members of their wider research network in other EU countries quietly suggesting that if successful they might be well advised to relocate to a country where there will be no issues about holding the grant.
So in the Autumn I could be looking at not only losing Euro4.5 million of funding but also three exceptionally talented members of staff.
That's the reality here at the coal-face of scientific research in the UK.
-
No, let's do the debate. Tell me how you think that the furniture retail industry is going to gain from Brexit. Seriously, we could do with some good news.
My point too - see above.
I am struggling to see how an industry sector heavily reliant on imports and also affected by the overall buoyancy (or otherwise) of the retail sector would be feeling confident, rather than concerned by the brexit vote.
-
I'm glad that you accept my inside knowledge on this as being more authoritative than most.
In what way would furniture retail gain?
Aren't you importing products to then sell to the public - won't the drop in the rate of sterling make your product range more expensive and therefore require you either to pass on that increase in price to customers (who may therefore choose not to buy) or cut margins therefore reducing profitability or require efficiency savings.
Also surely a sector such as furniture retailing must be rather susceptible to the broader health of the economy - sure we all need chairs, beds, tables etc, but when times are tough we may choose not to replace but to allow existing furniture to last a little bit longer.
Also isn't your sector fairly linked to the housing market - people move house, particularly to a bigger place and they also buy new furniture. If the housing markets become suppressed, with less transactions, less new builds (we are already seeing signs of this) there will be less people moving and deciding that their old sofa just won't do in their new place.
Now I'm not an expert, but as I've give a detailed expert view on why brexit has already been negative for scientific research it would be good for you to explain why it will be positive for furniture retailing as I genuinely can't see why it would be, but presumably you can provide an explanation.
There is no solid oak furniture made in this country so any price increases will be experienced by all retailers, we have more room for cutting prices than almost all of our competitors being direct source, just one store.
If the market gets smaller, no signs of this yet (highest ever sales for July) we can increase market share by cutting prices and continue our growth. Oak Furniture Land started as the Container Clearance Company in 2007 ish, they grew through the recession and now turnover is £300million ish.
Furniture sales are influenced by house moves and non-house moves, one of most interesting cohorts is people that take their property off the market, they often elect to redecorate with a handsome budget.
The biggest reason why I think Furniture retail would benefit is the opportunity to negotiate free trade deals with many more markets and this should help to drive prices down for UK consumers.
I'd rather not debate with someone who is going to call people twats, what will that be like 'I know you are but what are you etc' and anyway the debate is over, leave won.
-
There is no solid oak furniture made in this country so any price increases will be experienced by all retailers, we have more room for cutting prices than almost all of our competitors being direct source, just one store.
But you talked about the 'field' of furniture retailers - i.e. the whole sector, not just solid oak furniture retailers, still less just you one store. So what you appear to be saying is that some individual businesses may buck the trend of the sector - but that isn't what you implied, nor what I asked, which was clearly a view that the sector as a whole is going to gain.
If the market gets smaller, no signs of this yet (highest ever sales for July) we can increase market share by cutting prices and continue our growth. Oak Furniture Land started as the Container Clearance Company in 2007 ish, they grew through the recession and now turnover is £300million ish.
See above, you are focussing on your single company not the sector. Sure your sales may have remained buoyant but that doesn't seem to be the case for retail as a whole, still less for discretionary spending on big ticket items, which furniture would seem to be:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/pmi-7-year-low-consumer-spending-down-brexit-eu-referendum-a7131151.html
Furniture sales are influenced by house moves and non-house moves, one of most interesting cohorts is people that take their property off the market, they often elect to redecorate with a handsome budget.
I can see that as being true, but to what extent would that counter the need for people who have moved to buy new furniture, or that in times of tightening of belts (whether actually needed or due to concern as to what the future might bring) that new furniture is an expensive 'nice to have' in many cases and therefore the first type of purchase to suffer.
The biggest reason why I think Furniture retail would benefit is the opportunity to negotiate free trade deals with many more markets and this should help to drive prices down for UK consumers.
Theoretically possible, but pure speculation and certain this type of speculative horizon gazing will have no effect on the current state of the sector.
I'd rather not debate with someone who is going to call people twats, what will that be like 'I know you are but what are you etc' and anyway the debate is over, leave won.
But that wasn't me.
No the debate isn't over, it has barely begun. The real debate - what the future of the UK should be is only just starting. Indeed our PM doesn't appear to want to start that debate until 2017 at the earliest.
-
Of course any downturn in the economy will have an effect on most retailers.
Theoretically possible, but pure speculation and certain this type of speculative horizon gazing will have no effect on the current state of the sector.
Its not speculative, Australia is already keen to crack on.
But that wasn't me.
Apologies correct I should have done a new post.
No the debate isn't over, it has barely begun. The real debate - what the future of the UK should be is only just starting. Indeed our PM doesn't appear to want to start that debate until 2017 at the earliest.
Yes makes sense, see what deals could be done, what is on offer from the EU then maybe the debate starts again.
-
Of course any downturn in the economy will have an effect on most retailers.
So you accept then that the downturn in the economy (reduced growth, loss of consumer confidence, increased costs for retailers that import products to sell) that we are already seeing will detrimentally accept the retail sector, albeit with some individual companies bucking the overall trend.
In which case you will need to retract your earlier comment that:
'the field i do work in, furniture retail stands to gain'
Sure your particular company might be one of those that bucks the trend (in part because others may go out of business) but the overall affect on the furniture retail sector is negative.
Its not speculative, Australia is already keen to crack on.
Of course it is speculative
How many new deals so we have in place - zero.
How many new deals are close to completion - zero.
How many negotiations on new deals have formally started - zero.
In fact we don't even have sufficient experience trade negotiators in the UK to have any hope of negotiating multiple deals in any serious timeframe. I gather we have less than 20.
Yes makes sense, see what deals could be done, what is on offer from the EU then maybe the debate starts again.
No - that is the debate. Prior to the referendum the debate was in fantasy land cake and eat it territory. That isn't a debate, merely wishful thinking (we can have full access to the free market and significant limitations to freedom of movement).
We are now into the real debate - if we leave which is more important - access to the free market (I think you'd support that one) or restrictions on freedom of movement (clearly JK's line in the sand). You can't have both - we have to face up to reality rather than wishful thinking fantasy.
-
So you accept then that the downturn in the economy (reduced growth, loss of consumer confidence, increased costs for retailers that import products to sell) that we are already seeing will detrimentally accept the retail sector, albeit with some individual companies bucking the overall trend.
In which case you will need to retract your earlier comment that:
'the field i do work in, furniture retail stands to gain'
Your "credible sources" predicted -0.5% GDP for two quarters, if that happened then its a minor loss for furniture retail overall short term, long term we would see gains, more markets to import from, results in greater choice for consumers, lower prices.
Of course it is speculative
How many new deals so we have in place - zero.
How many new deals are close to completion - zero.
How many negotiations on new deals have formally started - zero.
In fact we don't even have sufficient experience trade negotiators in the UK to have any hope of negotiating multiple deals in any serious timeframe. I gather we have less than 20.
I don't know the answer to all of those question no one does apart from the government, early news looks positive.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/16/theresa-may-plans-for-brexit-trade-deals-with-the-usa-and-austra/
No - that is the debate. Prior to the referendum the debate was in fantasy land cake and eat it territory. That isn't a debate, merely wishful thinking (we can have full access to the free market and significant limitations to freedom of movement).
We are now into the real debate - if we leave which is more important - access to the free market (I think you'd support that one) or restrictions on freedom of movement (clearly JK's line in the sand). You can't have both - we have to face up to reality rather than wishful thinking fantasy.
The vote is over, carrying on with doom and gloom predictions isn't going to get us far. I agree we can discuss what deal the EU might offer us, what deals we might get outside of the EU, when those are on the table you can then make a case for another referendum or simply leaving.
I'm assuming you will be arguing for another vote but wouldn't you agree it is too early to do that now?
I'd be up for a Norway type deal, they might offer a brake on immigration, they might ask for £3000million a week and offer no free movement, I don't know and neither do you.
We might in two years be in a place where we have a free trade deals with the EU\US\Australia agreed, some controls on immigration, a much reduced contribution to EU, no political union, and an economy that is growing faster than predicted by your "credible sources". At this point would you vote leave?
-
There is no solid oak furniture made in this country so any price increases will be experienced by all retailers, we have more room for cutting prices than almost all of our competitors being direct source, just one store.
If the market gets smaller, no signs of this yet (highest ever sales for July) we can increase market share by cutting prices and continue our growth. Oak Furniture Land started as the Container Clearance Company in 2007 ish, they grew through the recession and now turnover is £300million ish.
Right, so when you said "the furniture retail industry will benefit" you meant the furniture retail industry will be hit just like the rest of retail but your company is well positioned to survive. Well that's lucky for you. Others won't be so fortunate.
Furniture sales are influenced by house moves and non-house moves, one of most interesting cohorts is people that take their property off the market, they often elect to redecorate with a handsome budget.
But if the housing market slows, overall, will this be good or bad for the furniture industry?
The biggest reason why I think Furniture retail would benefit is the opportunity to negotiate free trade deals with many more markets and this should help to drive prices down for UK consumers.
Well we aren't going to even start negotiating free trade deals until two years after we trigger article 50. We could start talking with other countries now to short circuit the formal negotiations, but even if you have a trade deal on day one of New Little England, you have to survive the two years until then.
I'd rather not debate with someone who is going to call people twats, what will that be like 'I know you are but what are you etc'
This reply is to somebody who equates his one company to the whole furniture retail business. If that's the quality of your thought, well.
and anyway the debate is over, leave won.
No. Leave won a vote. It does not mean that they were right - in fact events have shown that the Leave campaign was a tissue of lies.
Hopefully there is still time to rescue something from the sorry mess that Johnson, Farage and Gove shat all over us, but it won't be rescued if we don't face reality.
-
I'd be up for a Norway type deal,
You should have voted to remain. The deal we have now is better than the deal Norway has.
We might in two years be in a place where we have a free trade deals with the EU\US\Australia agreed,
We technically can't even start negotiating free trade deals until we are out. Yes, we can have informal talks now but that is all.
some controls on immigration
Oh dear, you have bought the immigration myth.
Currently net immigration is 300,000 per year of which about 180,000 is from the EU. So our government could curb immigration by 120,000 tomorrow without leaving the EU and yet it doesn't.
Do you know why it doesn't? It's because immigration is good for the economy. Immigrants pay more to the exchequer than they take out, they are prepared to do jobs that locals won't and they provide a huge resource of labour for our companies.
a much reduced contribution to EU, no political union, and an economy that is growing faster than predicted by your "credible sources". At this point would you vote leave?
The IMF is predicting a World slow down caused by Brexit and a nearly 1% slow down in the UK. That doesn't sound much like "growing faster".
-
Dear Jeremyp,
Hopefully there is still time to rescue something from the sorry mess that Johnson, Farage and Gove shat all over us, but it won't be rescued if we don't face reality.
Bit players, leading role goes to Cameron, he is/was the boss, this whole comedy of errors lies at his feet, he tried to please his anti EU Tory pals and it backfired, bigtime!!
A poor leader, and his failure to be tough on EU negotiations, his full on austerity measures just fueled the fire, the people who voted brexit, they have justification in being angry, Cameron failed them, if he had put some investment into places like Sunderland then we would not have seen such a angry protest vote.
And this is what it was, a protest vote, but they were protesting about the wrong thing, we should never have had a EU referendum or not one so hastily put together, both sides of this campaign have let the country down but the buck stops at Cameron.
Gonnagle.
-
We might in two years be in a place where we have a free trade deals with the EU\US\Australia agreed
What planet are you on - there is absolutely no way we will have these deals in place in 2 years, unless we simply sign up to an off the shelf package such as the EEA.
As Jeremy P has pointed out we cannot actually start formal trade deal negotiations until we have actually left the EU and even then (unless an off the shelf package) they will take years to negotiate.
Now prior to the vote I regularly mentioned the EU/Canada deal - 12 years from announcement of an intention to do a deal, 8 years from the start of formal negotiations and still not in place.
Now you might argue this is because of the EU, but it isn't true.
Elsewhere you claim that 'Australia is already keen to crack on' - well no doubt they were also keen to crack on with a deal with Japan, which lets face it is a more important and logical partner for Australia. And indeed there is a deal with Japan - something called the Japan–Australia Economic Partnership Agreement. Due you know how long it took to sort it out? 8 years. Formal negotiations started in 2007 and it didn't come into effect until 2015. And as far as I am aware the deal only covers goods and not services.
So on that timeframe 'Australia is already keen to crack on' would mean we would be looking at a deal in place in 2024, and that's even if we accept that negotiations can formally start now - if we need to wait for 2 years for leave the EU then we'd be looking at 2026 at the earliest.
-
What planet are you on
Yeah ok enjoy debating with someone who is going to bother with that.
-
Dear Jeremyp,
Bit players, leading role goes to Cameron, he is/was the boss, this whole comedy of errors lies at his feet, he tried to please his anti EU Tory pals and it backfired, big time!!
Nevertheless he didn't spend the months leading up to Brexit constructing a tissue of lies in the way they did.
if he had put some investment into places like Sunderland then we would not have seen such a angry protest vote.
Ah, Sunderland. Sunderland was a major beneficiary of EU investment and now they are one of the regions that voted Brexit and yet is begging the government to replace the EU funding
http://nelep.co.uk/funding/european-funding/
I want to say "tough, you made your bed, now lie in it" but that would be seriously reckless given that families will probably lose their livelihoods and that would be a terrible punishment for merely being duped by Farage.
Unfortunately, I don't think the government will be replacing the EU grants. The slow down in the economy will be putting too much pressure on our finances.
-
Yeah ok enjoy debating with someone who is going to bother with that.
I sense you are in serious denial, picking up on the trivial and ignoring the substance of the posts.
-
Yeah ok enjoy debating with someone who is going to bother with that.
So yet again I provide some evidence to indicate that your assertions (always unevidenced) are naive and fanciful. And all you can do is detach yourself from the debate.
So you imply that we might have deals in place with USA/EU/Australia in 2 years yet this is the reality:
EU
deal with Canada - not in place after 12 years
USA
TTIP with EU - not in place after 5 years (or 18 years depending on when you start the clock ticking)
with Canada - 4 years to implement from formal negotiations starting
Australia
with Japan - 8 years to implement
-
I sense you are in serious denial, picking up on the trivial and ignoring the substance of the posts.
I ignore almost all of your posts Jeremy.
-
So yet again I provide some evidence to indicate that your assertions (always unevidenced) are naive and fanciful. And all you can do is detach yourself from the debate.
So you imply that we might have deals in place with USA/EU/Australia in 2 years yet this is the reality:
EU
deal with Canada - not in place after 12 years
USA
TTIP with EU - not in place after 5 years (or 18 years depending on when you start the clock ticking)
with Canada - 4 years to implement from formal negotiations starting
Australia
with Japan - 8 years to implement
No its not that, its the nature of the posts and trying to debate with someone who can't seem to conceive of being wrong.
I think we should you leave, I'm quite happy to admit I might be wrong and would be willing to change my mind at a later stage, you?
-
No its not that, its the nature of the posts and trying to debate with someone who can't seem to conceive of being wrong.
I think we should you leave, I'm quite happy to admit I might be wrong and would be willing to change my mind at a later stage, you?
Where on earth do you get the idea that somehow I can't conceive of being wrong - what a bizarre notion. I But the best way to guard against being wrong is to base your views on evidence - sure it might not be right, but it is better to have an evidenced view than an unevidenced one Jakswan.
So the specific issue here is about the time it takes to get a trade deal negotiated and implemented. You are somehow implying (without evidence) that we will have these in place by July 2018. A cursory glance at the evidence suggests this is complete fantasy and that trade deals take way longer than that to sort.
I read somewhere (I will try to find the link again) that the average time from initiation of formal negotiations to completion was 7 years. And of course we are way off the starting blocks of formal negotiations.
So 2024 seems a more realistic date for those deals to be in place and even then that is optimistic as it implies we are 'at the front of the queue', when we know that in many cases we will be at the back of the queue.
-
I ignore almost all of your posts Jeremy.
I was talking about the Prof's post.
You are in denial.
All of problems of leaving the EU are beginning to become apparent. The home truths of negotiating trade deals are making themselves known but all you care about is being insulted by other board members.
You said that the furniture industry will be OK but what you meant was that your oak table company will be fine and the rest can go to the wall.
You and the other 17 million Leavers have set the United Kingdom on the path to destruction. If I had made a decision that wrecked your company and put you out of a job, I expect you'd have some insults ready for me. Make no mistake, what you have done makes me really angry.
-
You and the other 17 million Leavers have set the United Kingdom on the path to destruction. If I had made a decision that wrecked your company and put you out of a job, I expect you'd have some insults ready for me. Make no mistake, what you have done makes me really angry.
I wouldn't go as far as to say that the UK is on the path to destruction - certainly not economically, although it may well cease to exist in a few yours time due to the brexit vote if Scotland becomes independent.
But we are in for a real hit on the economy and there will be job losses, companies going out of business, decreased investment, worsening of personal income and major strain on the public finances.
And Jakswan and his fellow co-brexit voters 'own' every single job loss, every hit on pensions, every increase in cost of living, every cut in public expenditure etc etc as a result of the vote. Every one. And that's of course why he doesn't want to accept the reality because to do so requires him to accept the responsibility. And that is why it is the duty of every remain voter to remind brexit voters constantly that they are responsible for the storm, that they own every single brexit induced negative effect.
-
I wouldn't go as far as to say that the UK is on the path to destruction - certainly not economically, although it may well cease to exist in a few yours time due to the brexit vote if Scotland becomes independent.
I see it as inevitable that Scotland will leave the Union if Brexit goes through. That is the sense in which I meant the UK will be destroyed.
But we are in for a real hit on the economy and there will be job losses, companies going out of business, decreased investment, worsening of personal income and major strain on the public finances.
And Jakswan and his fellow co-brexit voters 'own' every single job loss, every hit on pensions, every increase in cost of living, every cut in public expenditure etc etc as a result of the vote. Every one. And that's of course why he doesn't want to accept the reality because to do so requires him to accept the responsibility. And that is why it is the duty of every remain voter to remind brexit voters constantly that they are responsible for the storm, that they own every single brexit induced negative effect.
That's pretty much exactly my opinion.
-
I see it as inevitable that Scotland will leave the Union if Brexit goes through. That is the sense in which I meant the UK will be destroyed.
That is highly likely - destroyed is a bit of an emotive term though - perhaps cease to exist is better.
-
I wouldn't go as far as to say that the UK is on the path to destruction - certainly not economically, although it may well cease to exist in a few yours time due to the brexit vote if Scotland becomes independent.
But we are in for a real hit on the economy and there will be job losses, companies going out of business, decreased investment, worsening of personal income and major strain on the public finances.
And Jakswan and his fellow co-brexit voters 'own' every single job loss, every hit on pensions, every increase in cost of living, every cut in public expenditure etc etc as a result of the vote. Every one. And that's of course why he doesn't want to accept the reality because to do so requires him to accept the responsibility. And that is why it is the duty of every remain voter to remind brexit voters constantly that they are responsible for the storm, that they own every single brexit induced negative effect.
I think Jack Knave is more your level of debate, by your logic you campaigned for Tony Blair, how does hundreds of thousands of people dead rest with being your responsibility?
The fact is in a democracy you campaign for a position and try to convince the majority the position is correct. A failure to convince the majority is as much a failure of you as it is of the voters. Changing peoples minds is key which is what I'd focus on if I were you, I know changing your mind it hard for you to fathom but I do it a lot.
With regard to leaving the EU I'm still for leave, quite happy with a Norway type deal, and be open to another referendum once we know more.
-
I think Jack Knave is more your level of debate, by your logic you campaigned for Tony Blair, how does hundreds of thousands of people dead rest with being your responsibility?
This thread isn't about the Gulf War.
-
I wouldn't go as far as to say that the UK is on the path to destruction - certainly not economically, although it may well cease to exist in a few yours time due to the brexit vote if Scotland becomes independent.
But we are in for a real hit on the economy and there will be job losses, companies going out of business, decreased investment, worsening of personal income and major strain on the public finances.
And Jakswan and his fellow co-brexit voters 'own' every single job loss, every hit on pensions, every increase in cost of living, every cut in public expenditure etc etc as a result of the vote. Every one. And that's of course why he doesn't want to accept the reality because to do so requires him to accept the responsibility. And that is why it is the duty of every remain voter to remind brexit voters constantly that they are responsible for the storm, that they own every single brexit induced negative effect.
As a Remain voter, my impression of Jakswan was that he thought there were other considerations that were as important as economic considerations or more important e.g. not having to get the agreement of other EU members before the UK can put the brakes on immigration to the UK. IME people generally do not make decisions based on economic considerations alone.
The Remain arguments that were less hyperbolic were probably a lot more convincing to Leave voters - I have spoken to a few people who changed their minds and voted Remain and they said they did so because they tried to weigh up the actual issues in a less emotional frame of mind and steeled themselves to vote for what they thought was the least bad option.
I don't know about other ethnic minority communities but a lot of fairly recent young Sri Lankan immigrants I have spoken, who were employed in offices, banks or in jobs such as driving TFL buses said they voted Leave because they had seen the standard of living in their areas fall. They were pretty pragmatic about being viewed as racist - they were more interested in solving the issue of over-crowding and increased waiting times than worrying about being racist.
It's a more complex issue than economics - e.g. you would think that people would not have a problem with immigrants who were in well-paid jobs and contributing to the economy. Some doctors working in NHS hospitals said immigrants were not the main strain on the NHS - it was the elderly and issues like obesity and Type 2 Diabetes.
Whereas some of those working in GP or Dental practices blamed EU regulations about migrant access to the job market and their own government's funding cuts for some of the frustrations of their jobs such as increased responsibilities e.g. supervising or hiring EU doctors or trainees who did not have the same level of training/ qualifications or local cultural knowledge as British-educated and trained doctors, dentists and nurses. They said they would rather have the option to hire better-qualified non-Europeans. Or they would rather their government funded more places at British medical schools for British students.
-
The truth is that my great uncle was an original Desert Rat.
The other fact is that the reason they came into the war did matter.
Though financially we were left in debt to the USA the truth does matter and it does not change anything I said.
(((((In truth it is a fact that GOD used this country to bring the Jews back to Israel and to win the war against a tyrant. Without the faith element it still does not change the facts that what I said is true.)))))
A FACT, really?
-
As a Remain voter, my impression of Jakswan was that he thought there were other considerations that were as important as economic considerations or more important e.g. not having to get the agreement of other EU members before the UK can put the brakes on immigration to the UK. IME people generally do not make decisions based on economic considerations alone.
Your example is wrong but point is correct. The main reasons were about political union, demographic deficit, ability to create our free trade deals. You are right there were economic considerations and although Davey's credible reports had an agenda which undermined their credibility I still read them and took them into account. After all they all claimed if we left the EU we would still be richer than we are now by 2030.
Davey and others will all say that is not the important claim but it was important to me and my vote.
The Remain arguments that were less hyperbolic were probably a lot more convincing to Leave voters - I have spoken to a few people who changed their minds and voted Remain and they said they did so because they tried to weigh up the actual issues in a less emotional frame of mind and steeled themselves to vote for what they thought was the least bad option.
The Leave arguments that were less hyperbolic were probably a lot more convincing to Remain voters <insert anecdote to support claim here>.
I don't know about other ethnic minority communities but a lot of fairly recent young Sri Lankan immigrants I have spoken, who were employed in offices, banks or in jobs such as driving TFL buses said they voted Leave because they had seen the standard of living in their areas fall. They were pretty pragmatic about being viewed as racist - they were more interested in solving the issue of over-crowding and increased waiting times than worrying about being racist.
Not met meany people who are pragmatic about being viewed as racist, interesting.
It's a more complex issue than economics - e.g. you would think that people would not have a problem with immigrants who were in well-paid jobs and contributing to the economy. Some doctors working in NHS hospitals said immigrants were not the main strain on the NHS - it was the elderly and issues like obesity and Type 2 Diabetes.
Don't really disagree but the strain on the NHS is going to be directly related to the services it offers and the total population, if people are fat, get diabetes and die young they are not going to get old and get dementia.
You can argue that with better healthcare and healthy living that there is a demographic problem but if we have an issue with human population this is a phase we are going to need to go through. Lets say you need 5 people working paying taxes to support one retired and currently we have 4, importing an extra 1 solves the issue for now, but fast forward 30 years you have an extra person retiring..... not sure.
-
Jeremy is absolutely correct that the brexit vote is already having a negative impact on scientific research in the UK, it isn't drivel.
Now I don't know what you do Jakswan, but I am a research scientist and in a senior position within a research intensive university so part of my role is providing strategic management of the research activities. So I know what I'm talking about.
Really! Give us your field and position and I can check you out. My aunt was a senior lecturer and my brother-in-law a maths lecturer at university. So give us your title and university and we can check you out
So since the brexit vote there have been a significant number of instances where researchers in my institution have found they are no longer welcome in developing consortiums that are aiming at applying for EU funding in the newer future.
Well it would be difficult if we are no longer in the EU. But there is nothing stopping you applying for Government funding still... is there?
We are being excluded, and you can understand why. If you are putting together a consortium and one partner may no longer be eligible for the funding then that is a big risk - if they cannot participate then the ability of the overall consortium to deliver is compromised.
Basically, you are saying the scientist all too thick to do research individually. Have to do it collective together. Grow up.
Actually I have been asked, formally to keep a dossier of such occurrences, with the information to be submitted to the minister for universities and science.
So the people who would minister you don't know what you apply for. Sounds really dumb to me they need you to tell them what they should already know????
Brexit has also had a chilling effect on recruitment and retention. Top scientists are often more than happy to relocate internationally to the best place to support their research ambitions.
Excellent so the research will still be done... ::) :o
Although we haven't lost anyone yet I am aware of colleagues who are reactively looking to relocate into the remaining EU.
Why? are they the ones who cannot do it on their own?
Also in interviews earlier this week the issue of brexit was brought up by all the candidates as an issue of importance in their decision as to whether to take a position in the UK or elsewhere.
Well,if they cannot do it on their own or are not up to the Job. Best they relocate we need scientist who can think and act for themselves.
[/quote]
-
Oh dear, the farmers have realised they are up shit creek
http://www.farminguk.com/News/Farmers-who-voted-Brexit-now-at-dismay-due-to-thr-_42580.html?refer_id=1900
Just like Wales
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-wales-vote-leave-eu-referendum-result-brussels-funding-economy-a7136196.html
and people trying to sell houses in London
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/revealed-how-thousands-of-house-deals-collapsed-in-london-due-to-brexit-a3305526.html
-
Oh dear, the farmers have realised they are up shit creek
http://www.farminguk.com/News/Farmers-who-voted-Brexit-now-at-dismay-due-to-thr-_42580.html?refer_id=1900
I have read the article - very interesting - and quite a few of the comments too - including the one about the fishing industry.
I learned yesterday that my local MP, a brexiter, has been relegated to a small office somewhere instead of one overlooking (or maybe in) Admiralty Arch. Okay, he's still a good MP, but ...
-
Really! Give us your field and position and I can check you out. My aunt was a senior lecturer and my brother-in-law a maths lecturer at university. So give us your title and university and we can check you out
You will, of course, to be fair - give your aunt's and brother-in-law's titles and universities in order that they can be checked out as well. Won't you?
-
Oh dear, the farmers have realised they are up shit creek
http://www.farminguk.com/News/Farmers-who-voted-Brexit-now-at-dismay-due-to-thr-_42580.html?refer_id=1900
Just like Wales
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-wales-vote-leave-eu-referendum-result-brussels-funding-economy-a7136196.html
and people trying to sell houses in London
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/revealed-how-thousands-of-house-deals-collapsed-in-london-due-to-brexit-a3305526.html
You know I think you are enjoying being a misery guts ;)
-
Basically, you are saying the scientist all too thick to do research individually. Have to do it collective together. Grow up.
You really know nothing. Working collectively is what science is all about. If there was a God he/she would be rolling his eyes that he/she managed to produce someone as monumentally deluded as you appear to be.
-
You know I think you are enjoying being a misery guts ;)
There's no point in hiding the consequences of this terrible decision under the carpet.
I'm not going to pretend everything is sweetness and light just because some turkeys voted for Christmas.
-
Dear Sass,
Basically, you are saying the scientist all too thick to do research individually. Have to do it collective together. Grow up.
You really should look deeper into this subject, the major leaps in science over the past ten years is because scientists have learned that sharing their knowledge for the good of humanity is the way forward, any steps that stop scientists sharing, i.e British scientists being cut out of the loop in EU funding is harming our own scientific research.
The evidence is all out there, or you could just read a ProfDavey post on the subject.
Gonnagle.
-
There's no point in hiding the consequences of this terrible decision under the carpet.
I'm not going to pretend everything is sweetness and light just because some turkeys voted for Christmas.
No, but you are claiming things are Brexit related when they are not, so IMO your world view is very biased. (Lloyds bank being a prime example)
I don't doubt, for scientists it is going to be a negative outcome for a while , until they can obtain alternative funding.
A lot of negativity comes about because people don't like change.
-
Any examples of changes that have taken place in science of farming. Seems a bit early coinsidering we are still a fully paid up member of the EU.
-
No, but you are claiming things are Brexit related when they are not, so IMO your world view is very biased. (Lloyds bank being a prime example)
It's Lloyds Bank that is claiming their redundancies are Brexit related, not me.
I don't doubt, for scientists it is going to be a negative outcome for a while , until they can obtain alternative funding.
Where's that going to come from? The mythical £350 million?
Anyway, it is not simply about the funding, it's also about the cooperation. Please read the Prof's posts on the subject, you might find them educational.
A lot of negativity comes about because people don't like change.
And quit with the platitudes.
Not all change is good. When your car hits a solid wall at 70mph, it changes. But only losers who don't like change would hit the brakes.
-
Any examples of changes that have taken place in science of farming. Seems a bit early coinsidering we are still a fully paid up member of the EU.
But we can see that when we stop being fully paid up members of the EU, all those lovely EU grants for science and farming and Wales and Cornwall.
Wales and Cornwall both voted overwhelmingly to quit the EU. That must mean that they presumably don't want the grants any more.
We don't know how scientists and farmers voted because it was a secret ballot, but any farmer or scientist who voted to Leave surely doesn't want those lovely EU grant anymore.
Or perhaps somebody lied to them about the money being replaced.
-
You will, of course, to be fair - give your aunt's and brother-in-law's titles and universities in order that they can be checked out as well. Won't you?
They are not here claiming their position. I am asking the other person to prove their credentials not my aunt or brother-in-law. They are not here and not relying on their positions for anything.
Because I gave the means of checking it takes nothing away from him proving his credentials.
-
You know I think you are enjoying being a misery guts ;)
More like a toilet... takes everything in...LOL.
I cannot believe he thinks they will harm the country themselves.
No one really know what is going to happen but they don't believe it will that bad now.. :)
-
Dear Sass,
You really should look deeper into this subject, the major leaps in science over the past ten years is because scientists have learned that sharing their knowledge for the good of humanity is the way forward, any steps that stop scientists sharing, i.e British scientists being cut out of the loop in EU funding is harming our own scientific research.
The evidence is all out there, or you could just read a ProfDavey post on the subject.
Gonnagle.
So tell me Gonnagle what God teaches about the beginning and the end?
Does it actually affect anything he teaches? Gonnagle you are out of touch.
-
They are not here and not relying on their positions for anything.
No. But you are.
So we can assume these scientists you claim you know are inventions. They don't exist.
-
No. But you are.
So we can assume these scientists you claim you know are inventions. They don't exist.
What scientist. What are you talking about?
I haven't a clue what you are talking about? EXPLAIN BECAUSE I MADE NO REFERENCE TO SCIENTIST THE OTHER PERSON SAID HE WAS A SCIENTIST...
I wanted to check his credentials. Haven't referred to any scientist I know. Sebastian Toe was like yourself. absolutely no idea what was being discussed.
-
What scientist. What are you talking about?
I haven't a clue what you are talking about? EXPLAIN BECAUSE I MADE NO REFERENCE TO SCIENTIST THE OTHER PERSON SAID HE WAS A SCIENTIST...
I wanted to check his credentials. Haven't referred to any scientist I know. Sebastian Toe was like yourself. absolutely no idea what was being discussed.
You said your aunt is a senior lecturer and your brother in law is a mathematician. If they are not scientists, why did you bring them up.
-
So tell me Gonnagle what God teaches about the beginning and the end?
Does it actually affect anything he teaches? Gonnagle you are out of touch.
How is that relevant to the extent to which science often proceeds through international collaboration ?
-
They are not here claiming their position. I am asking the other person to prove their credentials not my aunt or brother-in-law. They are not here and not relying on their positions for anything.
Because I gave the means of checking it takes nothing away from him proving his credentials.
You are relying on their position to check out another's position. So it is only fair that you provide the same information in order that we know that they actually exist and not just made up by you.
-
Sass, we know that you are a very imaginative and inventive person. After all, we get treated endlessly to your considerations of an imaginary companion who you have conjured from The Goat Herder's Big Book of Fairy tales.
I suspect that this senior lecturer and mathematician are equally imaginary - unless you show otherwise. It's up to you.
-
You said your aunt is a senior lecturer and your brother in law is a mathematician. If they are not scientists, why did you bring them up.
What i actually said was:
Quote from: ProfessorDavey on July 21, 2016, 01:18:59 PM
Jeremy is absolutely correct that the brexit vote is already having a negative impact on scientific research in the UK, it isn't drivel.
Now I don't know what you do Jakswan, but I am a research scientist and in a senior position within a research intensive university so part of my role is providing strategic management of the research activities. So I know what I'm talking about.
Really! Give us your field and position and I can check you out. My aunt was a senior lecturer and my brother-in-law a maths lecturer at university. So give us your title and university and we can check you out
As you can see the answer is clear. You just couldn't help yourself having not read the original post.
-
Sass, we know that you are a very imaginative and inventive person. After all, we get treated endlessly to your considerations of an imaginary companion who you have conjured from The Goat Herder's Big Book of Fairy tales.
I suspect that this senior lecturer and mathematician are equally imaginary - unless you show otherwise. It's up to you.
HH, read original post...
Quote from: ProfessorDavey on July 21, 2016, 01:18:59 PM
Jeremy is absolutely correct that the brexit vote is already having a negative impact on scientific research in the UK, it isn't drivel.
Now I don't know what you do Jakswan, but I am a research scientist and in a senior position within a research intensive university so part of my role is providing strategic management of the research activities. So I know what I'm talking about.
Really! Give us your field and position and I can check you out. My aunt was a senior lecturer and my brother-in-law a maths lecturer at university. So give us your title and university and we can check you out
HOWEVER all that is required to stop you moving the GOAL POST is this...
Quote from: ProfessorDavey on July 21, 2016, 01:18:59 PM
Jeremy is absolutely correct that the brexit vote is already having a negative impact on scientific research in the UK, it isn't drivel.
Now I don't know what you do Jakswan, but I am a research scientist and in a senior position within a research intensive university so part of my role is providing strategic management of the research activities. So I know what I'm talking about.
So give us your title and university and we can check you out
You see my relating to the fact having family members with degrees and being lecturers was merely the fact we can find out by their university and name exactly what they do. So the question stands. Give us the information so we can check the claims.
-
Goodness knows what Sass's rellies have to do with anything. Maybe we should check out they really exist, :D!
-
What i actually said was:
Really! Give us your field and position and I can check you out. My aunt was a senior lecturer and my brother-in-law a maths lecturer at university. So give us your title and university and we can check you out
As you can see the answer is clear. You just couldn't help yourself having not read the original post.
And what expertise do they have (if they exist) on scientific research?
-
And what expertise do they have (if they exist) on scientific research?
Re read the posts.. They and I, are not making claims to do with this thread.
I have merely asked for proof of the person who has made claims.
end of...
-
Jeremy is absolutely correct that the brexit vote is already having a negative impact on scientific research in the UK, it isn't drivel.
Now I don't know what you do Jakswan, but I am a research scientist and in a senior position within a research intensive university so part of my role is providing strategic management of the research activities. So I know what I'm talking about.
Really! Give us your field and position and I can check you out. My aunt was a senior lecturer and my brother-in-law a maths lecturer at university. So give us your title and university and we can check you out
As you can see the reference to my family is clearly to be able to check the other person out.
They have not made any personal references to themselves or claimed anything. This is NOT about anything to do with the contents of this thread. It is merely a fact that the person can be checked out. And of course the fact Stephen appears not to be able to furnish the proof he is working in research at a university at all.
So come on Stephen put up or shut up.
So since the brexit vote there have been a significant number of instances where researchers in my institution have found they are no longer welcome in developing consortiums that are aiming at applying for EU funding in the newer future.
Well it would be difficult if we are no longer in the EU. But there is nothing stopping you applying for Government funding still... is there?
We are being excluded, and you can understand why. If you are putting together a consortium and one partner may no longer be eligible for the funding then that is a big risk - if they cannot participate then the ability of the overall consortium to deliver is compromised.
Basically, you are saying the scientist all too thick to do research individually. Have to do it collective together. Grow up.
Actually I have been asked, formally to keep a dossier of such occurrences, with the information to be submitted to the minister for universities and science.
So the people who would minister you don't know what you apply for. Sounds really dumb to me they need you to tell them what they should already know????
Brexit has also had a chilling effect on recruitment and retention. Top scientists are often more than happy to relocate internationally to the best place to support their research ambitions.
Excellent so the research will still be done... ::) :o
Although we haven't lost anyone yet I am aware of colleagues who are reactively looking to relocate into the remaining EU.
Why? are they the ones who cannot do it on their own?
Also in interviews earlier this week the issue of brexit was brought up by all the candidates as an issue of importance in their decision as to whether to take a position in the UK or elsewhere.
Well,if they cannot do it on their own or are not up to the Job. Best they relocate we need scientist who can think and act for themselves.
[/quote]
-
Who is Stephen?
-
Who is Stephen?
Another imaginary friend?
-
Another imaginary friend?
Or an imaginary post?
I can't even work out which post nearly sane is responding too. :o
-
Or an imaginary post?
I can't even work out which post nearly sane is responding too. :o
The one before my post where Sassy refers to Stephen in reply to Prof Davey. Note once in the bit in red, and then immediately following that.
-
Or an imaginary post?
I can't even work out which post nearly sane is responding too. :o
It's even emphasised in RED for you - after all it makes all the difference in how important the words are ;)
-
Note I think Sassy has got Stephen Taylor and Prof Davey confused, despite Prof Davey's name being at the top of the post.
-
Who is Stephen?
No Idea, unless it the profs real name.
I have no idea why I wrote that, other than I might have been reading something elsewhere to a Stephen. Anyone wrote or addressed posts to a stephen? Will do a search. However let us not digress from the real reason for the post. Hey?
-
It goes to show and 'AMUSINGLY' I may add that you hang on my every word. :)
Must have been Stephens Law going nuclear??? ;D
-
Really! Give us your field and position and I can check you out.
In other words you want him to identify himself?
Really?
-
What i actually said was:
Really! Give us your field and position and I can check you out. My aunt was a senior lecturer and my brother-in-law a maths lecturer at university. So give us your title and university and we can check you out
As you can see the answer is clear. You just couldn't help yourself having not read the original post.
But you can make your imaginary aunt senior lecturer and brother in law mathematician say whatever you like - because they are imaginary. It's only fair that the Prof D knows who is checking him out.
-
But you can make your imaginary aunt senior lecturer and brother in law mathematician say whatever you like - because they are imaginary. It's only fair that the Prof D knows who is checking him out.
Oh please! Write a decent post and stop the drivel.
-
Oh please! Write a decent post and stop the drivel.
As most of your posts are nonsense because you make assertions without supporting evidence, it is you who is spouting drivel.
-
As most of your posts are nonsense because you make assertions without supporting evidence, it is you who is spouting drivel.
Says the person who insults God and then in the next breath says and writes:
"Lord,
Thank goodness you know me,
because I don't always know myself!
I suppose there is a purpose to the MENOPAUSE,
forgive me when I fail to see it!"
Which God were you writing the above to?
I guess when it comes to spouting drivel and saying one thing then meaning another.
Your accusation suits you better. I know in whom I believe and I don't pretend to be an atheist/agnostic and pray to God.
You forgot you wrote the above didn't you but more rich is the fact you think you can say one thing elsewhere then preach something else here.
The full prayer
Lord,
Thank goodness you know me,
because I don't always know myself!
I suppose there is a purpose to the menopause,
forgive me when I fail to see it!
Please help me to understand why bits of my anatomy
are travelling south at alarming speed.
Why does a nice juicy apple not have the same
'must eat' quality of a yummy chocolate cream gateau?
You don't get to my age without knowing a thing or two,
please help me to disseminate my wisdom
without saying the fatal words
'I told you so!'
I admit to an interest in others affairs;
keep me from passing on
the tempting gossip and smugness that comes
from not giving into similar temptation.
Support me while I listen to another's woes.
Help me to resist the urge
to regale the hapless person with my
much more important tales of adversity.
When complaining that the young
do not have the same qualities I possessed in my youth,
help me to realize that rose tinted spectacles
aid my recollection!
I notice a certain asperity has crept into my speech
when discussing the problems of society,
please make my response
more thoughtful and less prejudiced.
While I will never be a candidate for beatification,
please enable me to attain a level of amiability
so I do not repulse my family and friends.
I am mathematically challenged
so please assist me to count my blessings and realize
that I am the most fortunate of women.
AMEN
Moderator: content allowing poster to be identified removed
What supporting evidence did you use?
Never can you accuse anyone of speaking drivel where their is NO DOUBLE STANDARDS as you have proved yourself to have.
-
Oh please! Write a decent post and stop the drivel.
So you don't have anything intelligent to say.
-
Floo:
R-M, that was one heck of a prayer! Well done to you for writing down your thoughts in such a coherent way. It was a few years ago of course and you've left all that far behind you but it relevant to lots of people today and would have identified with what you wrote. You do have a way with words.
-
This is one of the most negative reports I've seen on Brexit - of course, this doesn't mean it's correct. Off-topic, I suppose, since it's not about science, but everybody else seem to be arguing about 'Stephen', so here goes.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36962059
-
Your example is wrong but point is correct. The main reasons were about political union, demographic deficit, ability to create our free trade deals. You are right there were economic considerations and although Davey's credible reports had an agenda which undermined their credibility I still read them and took them into account. After all they all claimed if we left the EU we would still be richer than we are now by 2030.
Davey and others will all say that is not the important claim but it was important to me and my vote.
It's certainly going to be interesting to watch what Leave do with trade negotiations and free movement of labour. Presumably some Remain groups will utilise the media to publish their own inaccurate claims or criticise from the sidelines, as the Leave campaign did.
Wondering also how Leave navigate less political union, more fragmentation within the UK and Europe as diverse groups want their views taken into consideration in decision-making. Whether we will see more social activists taking direct action - like the releasing of cockroaches at Byron Burger as a protest against crack downs on illegal immigration. Or maybe that was a protest against big businesses. It will be interesting to see if in the midst of Brexit there can be a perception of national freedom and a curb on immigration and profits by big businesses that ordinary people will feel more than compensates them for short-term job losses or hits to the economy.
Not met meany people who are pragmatic about being viewed as racist, interesting.
Well, not talking about racial violence but IME people from ethnic minority groups are not too bothered about expressing racist views to each other amongst their own communities - they are quite open about wanting to preserve certain aspects of their culture, which they have an emotional attachment to or feel is superior, rather than adopt cultural behaviour or attitudes from another ethnic group. And again IME they can equally understand why people from other ethnic backgrounds (including white English/ Welsh / Scottish/ Irish) might feel the same way about their own cultures and sub-cultures.
I support tolerance - it can be liberating not having to be PC - sentences tend to be shorter and to the point, and often quite funny. I was surprised to be asked by the parent (white English) of my daughter's friend, whether it was ok to let her child watch the comedy, Citizen Khan, as they thought it was racist or anti-Muslim in some way. My kid regularly watches it and many other programmes that poke fun at every group, including white English people.
Don't really disagree but the strain on the NHS is going to be directly related to the services it offers and the total population, if people are fat, get diabetes and die young they are not going to get old and get dementia.
You can argue that with better healthcare and healthy living that there is a demographic problem but if we have an issue with human population this is a phase we are going to need to go through. Lets say you need 5 people working paying taxes to support one retired and currently we have 4, importing an extra 1 solves the issue for now, but fast forward 30 years you have an extra person retiring..... not sure.
I think the problem for the NHS is that people have higher expectations for management of ill-health and at the same time don't die quickly enough (putting emotions aside). I think the ethics around competing claims for increases in expensive medical technology and expensive drugs, long-term treatment options and research is the issue as opposed to immigration so I think it's a shame there were false statements made about the NHS and immigration to influence the vote during the Brexit campaign. As opposed to focusing on options such as the ethics of withdrawing treatments or letting people die to free up resources, manage resources more efficiently or get in more tax payers (immigrants) today to delay the inevitable of having to eventually privatise a lot of the NHS treatments.
Efficiency seems to be a problem for Britain, which is often the reason why it is not competitive in the manufacturing sector. I'm not sure which is more palatable to the voters out of curbing immigration, raising personal taxes, not withdrawing NHS treatments and research OR curbing immigration, not raising personal taxes and withdrawing many NHS treatments and research.
-
Well, not talking about racial violence but IME people from ethnic minority groups are not too bothered about expressing racist views to each other amongst their own communities - they are quite open about wanting to preserve certain aspects of their culture, which they have an emotional attachment to or feel is superior, rather than adopt cultural behaviour or attitudes from another ethnic group. And again IME they can equally understand why people from other ethnic backgrounds (including white English/ Welsh / Scottish/ Irish) might feel the same way about their own cultures and sub-cultures.
So by saying that ethnic minority groups are more likely to be racist you are in fact a racist. Is culture based on race, you can be any race and belong to any culture can't you?
I support tolerance - it can be liberating not having to be PC - sentences tend to be shorter and to the point, and often quite funny. I was surprised to be asked by the parent (white English) of my daughter's friend, whether it was ok to let her child watch the comedy, Citizen Khan, as they thought it was racist or anti-Muslim in some way. My kid regularly watches it and many other programmes that poke fun at every group, including white English people.
Being anti-Muslim isn't about race, I think you are confusing the issue, the "white English" teacher could have been any race and asked the same question, they might not have asked if they were Muslim and white. Its sad you identify the color of persons skin that you think it somehow dictates their behavior.
I think the problem for the NHS is that people have higher expectations for management of ill-health and at the same time don't die quickly enough (putting emotions aside). I think the ethics around competing claims for increases in expensive medical technology and expensive drugs, long-term treatment options and research is the issue as opposed to immigration so I think it's a shame there were false statements made about the NHS and immigration to influence the vote during the Brexit campaign. As opposed to focusing on options such as the ethics of withdrawing treatments or letting people die to free up resources, manage resources more efficiently or get in more tax payers (immigrants) today to delay the inevitable of having to eventually privatise a lot of the NHS treatments.
Think I agree, whilst higher immigration does add demands to NHS it also adds a resource in Doctors and nurses. What false statements were made during the Brexit campaign, I seem to recall remain stated the NHS would be under resourced without immigration, which is a fair argument.
Efficiency seems to be a problem for Britain, which is often the reason why it is not competitive in the manufacturing sector. I'm not sure which is more palatable to the voters out of curbing immigration, raising personal taxes, not withdrawing NHS treatments and research OR curbing immigration, not raising personal taxes and withdrawing many NHS treatments and research.
Not aware it was that much of an issue.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita
-
So by saying that ethnic minority groups are more likely to be racist you are in fact a racist. Is culture based on race, you can be any race and belong to any culture can't you?
I didn't say ethnic minority groups are more likely to be racist - I said IME people from ethnic minority groups ....well you can read my previous post for yourself I assume. But if in your view, you think what I wrote means that I am "in fact a racist" that's absolutely fine with me, I have no problem with being called racist for my interpretation of my experiences.
Not sure I get your point about culture and race. My point was that IME people from ethnic minorities do not feel too troubled by wanting to retain certain parts of their culture - I didn't specify what those parts of their culture were or whether those parts of their culture were linked to their race. Nor have I made generalisations about people from ethnic minorities - I am specifically talking about my interpretation of my experiences e.g. parents who were relieved that I was just their son's friend and not their girlfriend, because I was the "wrong" ethnic background. I also didn't say that culture is based on race.
Being anti-Muslim isn't about race, I think you are confusing the issue, the "white English" teacher could have been any race and asked the same question, they might not have asked if they were Muslim and white. Its sad you identify the color of persons skin that you think it somehow dictates their behavior.
It wasn't a teacher - it was the parent of my daughter's friend. Um ok, I don't recall writing that a person's skin colour dictates their behaviour - but if you want to feel sad because you choose to believe I did write that, ok.
Anyway, back to my point - my impression was that the parent was worried about laughing at the behaviour and statements made by Mr. Khan because he was Muslim and brown and had a Pakistani accent, especially as the kids, including my own, were imitating the accent - and she spoke to me about it because I was brown and Muslim and she wanted to know if I was offended by it. There actually isn't too much in the comedy that is specific to Muslims - Mr Khan's daughter wears hijab but I have come across similar attitudes and accents in many brown, Indian/ Pakistani families regardless of whether they are Hindu, Sikh etc - I guess you haven't seen the sitcom. I haven't come across any white-skinned people with Mr. Khan's Pakistani accent - other than my daughter's friends imitating him - but not ruling out the possibility that they may well exist.
Think I agree, whilst higher immigration does add demands to NHS it also adds a resource in Doctors and nurses. What false statements were made during the Brexit campaign, I seem to recall remain stated the NHS would be under resourced without immigration, which is a fair argument.
Some Leave campaigners claimed £350 million a week saved by coming out of the EU could be used to fund the NHS. Another claim was Migration from the European Union will increase the UK's population by between 2.58 million and 5.23 million by 2030. This would create a 28% to 57% increase in demand for A&E services.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36345081
Not aware it was that much of an issue.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita
Productivity in GB lags behind most other G7 countries.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/apr/01/uk-productivity-growth-is-weakest-since-wwii-says-ons
https://fullfact.org/europe/factcheck-are-british-workers-less-productive-germans-and-french/
-
It wasn't a teacher - it was the parent of my daughter's friend. Um ok, I don't recall writing that a person's skin colour dictates their behaviour - but if you want to feel sad because you choose to believe I did write that, ok.
Anyway, back to my point - my impression was that the parent was worried about laughing at the behaviour and statements made by Mr. Khan because he was Muslim and brown and had a Pakistani accent, especially as the kids, including my own, were imitating the accent - and she spoke to me about it because I was brown and Muslim and she wanted to know if I was offended by it.
You did specify the parent was white like that had something to do with it. The parent actually said brown, she wouldn't have asked if you were black, white, asian?
I can understand a non-Pakistani non-Muslim asking the same question its a reasonable question isn't it? People in Norwich go all Gavin and Stacey accent on me quite a lot, they sometimes ask if I'm offended, their skin colour is irrelevant.
Have to respond to rest when I have more time.
-
Yes I specified she was white because she was white and my impression was that this was relevant partly because of the conversation and partly because no one else has asked me if I am offended by Citizen Khan, and I specified that I was relating my experiences.
To paraphrase the relevant part of the conversation:
ME: My daughter is doing pretty good Citizen Khan impressions and impressions of her dad's Sri Lankan accents and phrases to entertain her friends in the playground and now they are all doing accents - I hope the teachers don't tell them off for not being PC - my daughter might get away with the Pakistani or Sri Lankan accents because she is brown but not sure what they will say to the non-Asian kids.
WHITE PARENT: My son loves Citizen Khan - he thinks it's hilarious - but some of our friends have said I shouldn't let him watch it, that it seems a bit racist and offensive about Muslims, but you say you let your daughter watch it?
ME: Yes - my husband showed it to her - they watch episodes together on his iPhone on YouTube. Some white people seem too hung up about political correctness.
WHITE PARENT: Great - I'll let my son watch it and if my friends say anything, I'll say I spoke to you and you're brown and Muslim and you're ok with it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why are you surprised about the conversation? Our kids are friends so we know each other and have spent time together on shared school activities or discussing work.
You might have had different experiences, but that's why I am not making generalisations about my experiences here in London.
We seem to have drifted off-topic. Shall we get back to my points about Brexit?
-
Yes I specified she was white because she was white and my impression was that this was relevant partly because of the conversation and partly because no one else has asked me if I am offended by Citizen Khan, and I specified that I was relating my experiences.
If you were relating your experience that you found black people were a little less intelligent, it would still be racist.
Some white people seem too hung up about political correctness.
As are some black, brown, every other ethnic group. Non-Muslim middle class Brts might aspire to be politically correct with regard to Islam and not want to offend, this is to do with their education etc, not because they are a particular race.
racism
ˈreɪsɪz(ə)m/Submit
noun
the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
I'm not calling you a racist to offend simply stating a fact.
-
If you were relating your experience that you found black people were a little less intelligent, it would still be racist.
False analogy. My experience that some white people seem overly concerned about the way they treat me, a brown person, or other non-white minorities so that they do not come across as displaying feelings of white superiority and privilege that they often get accused of displaying by some non-white people is not the same as your statement about the innate intelligence of black people.
As are some black, brown, every other ethnic group. Non-Muslim middle class Brts might aspire to be politically correct with regard to Islam and not want to offend, this is to do with their education etc, not because they are a particular race.
You can only feel "guilty" about and over-compensate for your so-called white privilege, the British Empire etc if you are white.
racism
ˈreɪsɪz(ə)m/Submit
noun
the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
I'm not calling you a racist to offend simply stating a fact.
Being called a racist doesn't offend me. I'm ok with being a racist about this opinion, and probably about lots of other opinions.
-
You can only feel "guilty" about and over-compensate for your so-called white privilege, the British Empire etc if you are white.
Is that what you think people do? Wow when people ask if I'm offended by taking off my Welsh accent I don't think they are concerned about their "English privilege" but simply being considerate.
Being called a racist doesn't offend me. I'm ok with being a racist about this opinion, and probably about lots of other opinions.
Fair enough.
-
Is that what you think people do? Wow when people ask if I'm offended by taking off my Welsh accent I don't think they are concerned about their "English privilege" but simply being considerate.
Well it might have something to do with my discussions about the concept of "White privilege" with white people - oh no, am I being racist by using the word "white" - oh well.
ETA - do people also ask you if it is ok for their family members to watch a TV programme in their own house that might make fun of Welsh accents?
Thanks for your opinion, but I won't be taking my cue from you as you're not exactly known on here for your complexity of thought or reading the literature on any subject before commenting.
If you want to know about how certain sections of society and the media have pushed the idea of white privilege to shut down discussions, feel free to Google and read the numerous articles on the subject.
Back to Brexit - you were going to get back to me about the efficiency issue in Britain and how Leaving the EU will help?
There was a recent post-referendum Panorama programme about why people voted Leave. Immigration came up a lot - not in terms of racism but just in terms of a hope that a Leave vote would halt immigration because of the lack of investment in infrastructure and jobs paying a living wage to support increased numbers of immigration. There seemed to be a general feeling that neither the Tories or Labour cared enough about the investment in infrastructure issues because it did not affect them in Westminster, and that voting Leave was the only way for ordinary people to have their voices heard.
Some people who voted Leave supported a common market but not increasing political union, which they felt was unworkable.
-
Well it might have something to do with my discussions about the concept of "White privilege" with white people - oh no, am I being racist by using the word "white" - oh well.
ETA - do people also ask you if it is ok for their family members to watch a TV programme in their own house that might make fun of Welsh accents?
OIC no being racist is just the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race and I suppose prejudging people on that basis. So for example if I said my experience of some Muslims is that they are arrogant know-it-alls based on my experience of you it would Islamophobic, first I tend to not be prejudge people and secondly I know some really nice Muslims.
I know Islamophobia isn't based on race but similar sort of thing.
They have never asked that specific question but they have asked the same sort of question as I have outlined.
To two examples, people asking me if I'm offended or you are offended, in your example you think they have done it because they are white and in my example I think they did it because they were trying to be nice.
Who knows the true motive...
Thanks for your opinion, but I won't be taking my cue from you as you're not exactly known on here for your complexity of thought or reading the literature on any subject before commenting.
Your opinion, we both have low opinions of each other which happily doesn't bother either of us.
Back to Brexit - you were going to get back to me about the efficiency issue in Britain and how Leaving the EU will help?
Since you don't value my opinion and I don't value yours a discussion isn't going to get anywhere, besides the Bremoaners on here have a demonisation parade with a jakswan effigy leading the line. I've discussed Brexit a lot but we are going over the same ground over and over, time for me to move on.
-
OIC no being racist is just the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race and I suppose prejudging people on that basis. So for example if I said my experience of some Muslims is that they are arrogant know-it-alls based on my experience of you it would Islamophobic, first I tend to not be prejudge people and secondly I know some really nice Muslims.
Yes it would be pretty dumb to think that a Muslim on a forum that is often frequented by arrogant know-it-alls was representative of 1.6 billion Muslims world-wide.
To two examples, people asking me if I'm offended or you are offended, in your example you think they have done it because they are white and in my example I think they did it because they were trying to be nice.
Who knows the true motive...
Well I don't know what the true motive is in your case as I wasn't party to the conversation you were having. But in my case I can have an idea of the motive or find out the motive during the course of the conversation by asking the people I am talking to. I can even discuss articles like this with white people and find out what they think and post my understanding or opinions of what they said in threads on this forum.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/the-younger-generations-new-wave-of-political-correctness-is-a-d/
Your opinion, we both have low opinions of each other which happily doesn't bother either of us.
I have no opinion of you - I don't know you - but I do have an opinion of your posts on this forum.
Since you don't value my opinion and I don't value yours a discussion isn't going to get anywhere, besides the Bremoaners on here have a demonisation parade with a jakswan effigy leading the line. I've discussed Brexit a lot but we are going over the same ground over and over, time for me to move on.
Ok but I am not on this forum to value anyone's opinion or cheer anyone on - I just come here to find out what people think and why.