LondonMix

I'm waffling :)

Sorry, not LL but the high street in general throughout the UK. Many high streets are suffering from terminal decline as big box retailers and the internet increasingly eat up market share. For shops to succeed they need to offer niche quality or product.

I'm not a conservative, lib-dem or Daily Mail Reader. I simply disagree with you for the reasons I have already made clear.

Yes exactly, dining is a service not threatened by the internet and the offering is unique from what the high street provides. The point is that the high street retailers are dying...

The economic reality that I speak of is the fact that we spend more money than we have and that this cannot go on. The other reality I speak of is the fact that people are living longer and the demographic changes (larger proportion of the population being elderly) mean that pension arrangement that were feasible for our parents are impossible for us. Please explain how I'm delluded as I'd love to be wrong! Avg pension includes people who spend short time in the profession. Any teacher who worked 40+ years in teaching would have a great pension. My partner in the civil service after 30 years will be entitled 75 percent of avg indexed salary adjusted for inflation for life. This plus state pension. Teacher pensions are somewhat different but not drastically. I know where of I speak...

The Mary Portas scheme really highlights the challenges facing thr high street. Traditional high street retailing is disappearing. The only shops that will survive are those offering services / experiences and those that provide unique products DaveR Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > As a generalisation, I expect proper chain outfits > to deliver standardised products cheaper and more > efficiently than non-chains, and 'independents' to > do a better job with non-standard stuff. Because > standardised products usually only work up to a > certain level of quality, the easiest niche for > independents to operate in is top end bespoke type > goods/services. Unfortunately, although you can > make high margins doing this, you make more profit > from the same square footage by piling high and > selling cheap, hence even successful independents > getting priced out. > > On the other hand, chain operators have higher > ultimate overheads to pay (head office etc.) and > so have less flexibility and tolerance of > underperforming units, so if it ain't working they > will close down and bugger off - sharpish. Worth > remembering if you're a commercial landlord. > > Back on topic, Wagamama is mediocre at best IMHO, > tho' I'm not that keen on ramen anyway. I like > pho (but haven't tried 'PHO' - is it any good?), > but if I had a free choice for a new resto on LL > I'd go for Middle Eastern - tagine, brochette, > cous cous etc.

My sister is a teacher as is one of my best friends so please don't presume to tell me I don't know anyone in the profession. I think what I and perhaps Kes were saying is that during difficult financial times, entitlements across the board need to be reduced and that teachers are not owed a special exception. Pension schemes in the public sector have changed to reflect the new economic reality. Private sector pensions are non-existent for most and even the best private sector pensions pale in comparison to what is available in the public sector / teachers. No one wants to deny teachers what the desire out of spite but most won't view your demands as necessities given that virtually everyone in the country lives without them. The reality is we the tax payer cannot afford it and we the working public don't view what you are being asked to accept a particular hardship relative to what others in our society have had to shoulder. The idea anyone, much less a teacher, should be entitled to a job for life irrespective of performance is shocking and certainly would not be to the benefit of children. I would be interested to hear teachers' counter-proposal to the current inspection / accountability regime (as parents I think we agree even if the current system is flawed something must be in place). However, I suspect that if the union got what it wanted regarding compensation that the other concerns would disappear... If the union was protesting funding of education, the creation of academies etc I would be very interested to hear the arguments you were putting forward and decide if I support the strike action. However, based on your responses, its clear that the strike action has nothing to do with anything of the sort. LocalTeacher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Kat,Londonmix what is wrong with teachers wanting > less inspections , a reasonable workload and a job > for life? > if you worked in a school or knew someone that did > then you would know that is getting silly. > i am all for high standards in school , and want > nothing more than good teaching practice praised > and poor teaching to be dealt with. > A class teachers work is scrutinised by fellow > teachers, their key stage leader, a senior > management team line manager , the head, governers > ,local education authority moderators long before > ofsted and HM inspectors turn up . this is without > mentioning students , teaching assistants and > parents > fair enough. its important that we get it right > and a lot of teachers take the endless work on the > chin while others moan and get on with it. > > we do it cos we luv teaching > > a job for life ? > seems fair as we devote our life to our job > we deserve a decent pension if we do it for > 40+years > we should not be making up the shortfall because > governments have overspent elsewhere > dont be angry at teachers for getting what they > are due > we are all paying more for less > being duped > but its ok cos tescos are whacking out unhappy > chickens for 2.29 > and its not too long till half term

I also found that comment within the M&S debate a sad testament to how difficult some people find it to make a coherent argument. I'm not a fan of Waga, I like the feel of ED and the aesthetic of its shops but I don't hate chains by definition and prefer to vote with my wallet Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > LondonMix, you've nailed it! > > It's a debate hinging on conflicting meanings of > the word 'chain'. At the one end it means two or > more connected commercial establishments, at the > other it just means 'rubbish'. > > UDT was famous for this over the subject of > 'commercial music'. In his view 'commercial' > simply meant terrible. Therefore he could insist > with impunity that all commercial music was shit, > and if someone identified some quality popular > music, he could prove that by definition if it was > good it wasn't commercial. > > You can see that in this confusing context, a > debate about whether 'chains' are bad is > meaningless. > > On a similar note I'm impressed by those that > argue that the replacement of Iceland by M&S is > bringing 'chains' into Lordship Lane. With over > 800 stores, Iceland is clearly a world beating > chain! In this context 'chain' doesn't even mean > 'bad', it simply means 'shops that I don't like', > with no attempt at objectivity at all.

Again, what are the aims of the strike? What austerity measures specifically do they want reversed and what are they asking for in terms of pay? Depending on the details I may or may not be supportive. These are tough times and spending decisions need to be weighed carefully and throught through rationally. If its really retirement ages, pensions and greater scrutiny through inspections that they are strking about I can't say I am sympathetic...

Can you layout exactly what the aims of the strike are?

Everyone did. People across the private sector have had pay freezes or been forced to accept reduced hours. Many positions in the public sector (in addition to teaching) have had pay freezes for years now-- I know as my partner is in the civil service. This is not some unique assault on teachers. In a recession in a country with a massive budget deficit everyone is feeling the pain. Cutting special ed worries me, but I think you need some perspective on how the current economy is affecting the general public (private and public sector).

No offence but no one has any idea how most establishments they go into are run. Your statement basically amounts to, if I like it, it?s not a chain even if it has multiple branches and if I don't like it, it is. This is why the debate about chain stores is always so ridiculous. The people who are involved with TGE have something like 40 pubs. A large proportion of the shops and restaurants in ED that you wouldn't suspect have branches elsewhere throughout London (Le Chardon, for instance). I like the whole shabby-chic, aren't we just so bare bones and indie aesthetic that pervades shops here but don't kid yourself: it?s marketing, just of a different sort. LondonLogCo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think a chain is, when those who set it up step > back a let go of control > > Then the beancounters scrape every modicum of joy > out of the offer. Prices are tweaked, suppliers > go, portions shrink & they open in Bromley or > Bluewater > > Byron Burger is rapidly going this way, in fact > it's gone already. Take a look at Northcote Rd for > the possible future of LSL. Some good, some bad.

DJ, good post and while I am in the pro-assisted suicide camp I think what you say highlights how tricky it all is. Given that we try to generally treat suicidal thoughts, when can we say someone's life 'objectively' becomes not worth living and so their desire to end their life isn't symptomatic of a mental imbalance but rather is a 'rational' request? With trapped in syndrome, most of us can agree though I'm sure there are people with this illness who want to live. Where do we draw a bright red-line and what are we saying to people with various illnesses and disabilities about how we as a society view their lives? I'd hate to be a judge! Before anyone could request assisted suicide, we probably would need to allow them time to adjust to their new circumstances and offer mental health and support group services for a period of time to them and their families before giving the green light... Hueg- I couldn't agree more that fragmentation of traditional family and social structures is leading higher rates of isolation and depression- not just amongst the elderly...

How successful does Honest Burger have to become before we consider it a chain and ban it? Is Brixton, SoHo and ED the limit before we consider it a chain? No chain starts out that way. Saying you don't want a shop simply because its managed to grow to multiple branches as so many people on here are arguing is rediculous (though not the post below I acknowledge!). If you don't like the quality of a specific restaurant then fine but there are loads of horrible indie shops too. lane lover Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I cant stand Wagamamas or GBK for that matter. I > would prefer some of the independent "pop up" > restaurants from Brixton Village to open up a > second restaurant on LL. For example, Honest > Burger would be a great replacement for GBK; they > have already opened up a second store in Soho. > > Also, I think we need a decent sushi restaurant. > And not Yo Sushi!

Its more complex than that. For the logistics of out of centre locations to be viable a certain number of bikes do need to be returned. The costs of ferrying bikes is part of the decision regarding viability. the-e-dealer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > They dont expect people to return the bikes. They > are retuned in bulk by Lorry.

Yes DJ, but when someone has suicidal thoughts (able-bodied or not) we as a society as a first step try to treat the depression if that's the root cause. As depression is a chemical imbalance often unrelated to the specific situation someone is living in, I think Silverfox is just showing that the position is a bit hypocritical. Clearly both the able-bodied and the disabled can lead fulfilling lives or be depressed and we should opt for treatment of a mental imbalance (if that's what we are dealing with) for everyone as suicidal thoughts at times can respond to treatment. I am in the pro-camp for assisted suicide but in terms of checks and balances clearly ensuring that the suicide is the wish of the person doing it is essential.

I agree, alligator is delicious :) Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I've not eaten horse. I've always wanted to, but > never had the chance. I don't see the difference > between eating horse and cow or sheep. > > I've eaten kangaroo and caiman alligator (Brazil), > though. I'd happy recommend them both. I've also > eaten piranha, but they just taste like any fish, > really.

Stacey-lyn is right (pelvic pain from pregnancy still doesn't give you the right to determine planning issues though one might argue you've earned the right) In addition to national planning legislation, we also have Supplemental Planning Documents (SPD) which detail local requirements. Here is the current draft of the Dulwich SPD http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200151/supplementary_planning_documents_and_guidance/1247/dulwich_spd/1 Robin Crookshank Hilton (village ward councillor) will be working with the other local councillors and the local community on this as the consultation will begin in the next few months and will have a huge impact on how the Dulwich area develops in future. Do a search for Robin if you want more information but I think once the consultation begins they are planning to launch a dedicated thread on the forum.

I didn't say blocking the chains as such, which I agree is not likely (and I don't think blocking specific businesses should be allowed anyhow). However, the SPD can determine planning requirements for LL specifically within Southwark. The SPD is determined with the community and if its agreed that shops cannot expand their footprint, many chains won't be able to move it as currently the premises are too small for their business models. This will maintain the character of the shopping area (small-scale / villagey) even if the mix of shops changes. It?s just a by-product that it will probably prevent certain chains from entering.

I know what you mean but most chains need to operate on a scale quite a bit larger than the shops that exist in ED. With the new SPD up for discussion, there is a good chance we as a community can decide to block over-development of shops which will likely result in most (though not all) shops remaining independent stores. Still, pricier boutiques will replace the current shops as has already been happening for the past 5 years. In the end, as the area becomes more affluent the best you can hope for if you keep things small scale is something akin to Barnes shopping areas (pricy but still fairly independent). I?m torn as at the end of the day, I'm not sure that's much better than chains. I like the independent shops personally but when I talk to my in-laws who live on a tighter budget, they get really annoyed when large store planning applications are blocked as they prefer the cheaper prices and convenience of superstores. They grew up with having to visit the butcher and the fishmonger and baker separately and are distinctly less romantic about the whole thing and find it a waste of time. It?s a kind of luxury to be able to support a high street like LL.

Its much more complex than that. Most less-advantaged areas are not filled with wonderful independent shops. Chains are usually cheaper than independents and poorer areas often suffer from lots of vacant shops. Independent shops need a certain amount of affluence to exist. The high rents are a by-product of a successful high-street with limited vacancies and lots of foot-fall. Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > " It is very sad. Really hope that ED doesn't end > up just another clone town. Wasn't so long ago > that the prospect of Neros on LL generated > protest, now there are people calling for chains > to come here. I don't get it." > > Typical, people rush in to an area, push the > prices sky high, landlords run their hands in > glee, independents move because they can't afford > to stay.

Agree with Dave. All you have to do is read Malthus to see that this is a concern that has cropped up several times and each time technoligical advances have met the challenge.

There have been some threads on this in the past. Depending on experience, there appears to be a pretty wide range: 8.5-10 per hour net. 20% more for a nanny share.

Okay, I don't disagree with you on any of that and agree that the position BB100 took is also too extreme in my view. The only reason why I waded in was after reading the research you posted, I felt that the way you presented the conclusions in the post were too extreme in the other direction and somewhat misrepresnted the conclusions. I personally suspect that "over parenting" can actually be harmful in certain contexts to kids autonomy so really with you on this for the most part. It's just not black or white in either direction. Certain types of parental involvement has been shown to help.

If you are saying that a portion of intelligence / aptitude is inherited then I doubt anyone can argue with that. In fact, I think most posters were simply stating that you as a parent have more impact than the school as long as the school doesn?t have any serious failings. If you are arguing that there is nothing else that impacts how well children perform given their ability or that cognitive development is not influenced by factors other than genetics then I think that's where people are challenging you. The first article you mention questions the quality of the evidence in support of certain types of interventions and clearly states that other types of interventions have been proven to work well. You have taken that quote on AAB so far out of context, I feel compelled to post the full section for those parents who don?t have time to read through the document. Also, the economist in the feakonomics post mischaracterizes the results of the Korean adoptee study. For those who don't have time to read it, the parents background does have a proven impact on the attainment of non-biological children but not as strong an impact as genetics. Extract from First Article. A significant factor in reaching this conclusion was the quality of evidence available. This, in part, reflected the standard of evidence the programme demanded. Whilst a lower benchmark might have yielded different conclusions, this standard was considered appropriate given the significant cost of educational provision and the questionable ethics of using unproven interventions on children during such a critical period in their lives. This conclusion leads to three main points: 1 Whilst there have been many interventions aimed at addressing the AABs of poorer children or parents, few have been explicitly aimed at raising attainment. 2 Much of the evidence that is available is of a very mixed nature. This is primarily because of how previous interventions and evaluations have been designed and implemented. Predictably, where evaluations were small scale, process-orientated, poorly-resourced or ?bolted-on? during the life of interventions, or used inappropriate research tools, the resulting evidence was weak and inconclusive. 3 The evidence that is currently available offers only limited support for the impact of most interventions aimed at AABs on attainment or participation. This does not mean that nothing can be done. Detailed analysis of the existing evidence reveals threebroad levels of effectiveness. This has significant implications for policy-making, practice and evaluation. ? Even when demanding standards were applied, interventions focused on parental involvement in children?s education demonstrated evidence of impact on raising attainment. This suggests that an immediate focus for both policy and practice should be on developing a full cost-effective model of delivery of this type of intervention and ensuring detailed ongoing monitoring. ? There is some evidence of a relationship between outcomes and interventions focused on addressing participation in extra-curricular activities, mentoring, and also on improving self-confidence. However, this is not sufficiently compelling to recommend roll-out at this stage. This suggests that further development of these kinds of interventions should be subject to full-scale trials alongside well-designed evaluations to determine effectiveness. ? There is little or no evidence improved outcomes from interventions focused on things like addressing children?s general attitudes to education or the amount of paid work children do during term time (e.g. a paper round). This does not mean that such interventions may not be valuable in their own right or that they do not have any impact on the educational experience or personal circumstances of children and young people. However, the available evidence is clear that these kinds of interventions should not be undertaken in the belief that they will make a contribution towards raising attainment or participation through changing attitudes, aspirations or behaviour. This distinction of three ?levels? of evidence is important. In the current economic climate, it is perhaps more important than ever that policy-makers and practitioners seeking to raise educational attainment and participation in post-compulsory education know which interventions: Later in the article, an interesting conclusion that stresses how social capital can very directly influence life outcomes. However, the study stressed that the real difficulty for many children was in knowing how to fulfil their ambitions. Rather than raising aspirations in order to raise attainment, there is a real need for children and parents to be offered support to learn more about educational and career options so they can make more informed decisions about their future.