david_carnell

Bird in George Bush Road?

We should be giving more. Now is NOT the time to stop aid giving.

If you sign a contract for benefits that says you have to do unpaid work I would imagine a court wouldn't have much to say about it.

I don't wish to pick fault LadyM, as ideologically we are on the same side, but there are some flaws with your "option 3". You do not pay tax on JSA. Fares to the JobCentre are paid if they are more than one bus fare ride away. And most urban job centres are easily with walking distance for most people. You only have to visit the job centre once a fortnight. You have to present evidence to show you've applied for a minimum of three jobs in that fortnight. That's not much to ask in return for your benefit. Costs of getting to job interviews are also paid for by the job centre. That would even include air-fare if it was the cheapest and most efficient means of getting there. After 3 months all JSA claimants receive half-price bus travel. After 6 they receive half price travel on all public transport. Not all job centre staff are unhelpful or barely literate. I was one. I agree the current system is in dire need of reform but the overly simplistic pictures I'm seeing painted by both sides bear no resemblence to what I worked amongst for nearly a year in 2009/10.

Kind Hearts and Coronets. Guiness x 8

Robocop. Robots. Cops. Criminals.

The 25% was arbitrary and is entirely flexible, but someone, somewhere has to investigate just how many graduates we really need. I don't doubt that more than 25% of people are capable of getting a degree from some sort of university but one of the reasons to have a degree is, not so much what you learn being directly relevant to your future employment, but to differentiate yourself from the herd - to show you are part of the intellectual elite capable of learning to a high level. This should be something an employer would cherish. These days you now have to gain post-graduate qualifications to do so, incurring further debt in seeming spiral of further study. We'll all have to be professors soon just to stand out. Ridiculous. Degrees are becoming a devalued currency. The question of equality, as DJKQ and LadyM have noted, is that of access. The difficulty that the Labour Party realised is that whilst you have the public school system being awarded a disproportionate amount of university places it will distort up the chain. By aiming to send such vast numbers to university it was hoped to overcome this issue.

You can't have it both ways. Either the courses are rubbish or they're all fine and there are just too many? Which is it? And you've basically just reached the same conclusion I highlighted....that there are too many graduates and not enough graduate jobs. Take away university status from old polytechnics, reduce degree numbers and breadth and concentrate the money on those students who are genuinely in the top 25%.

I don't think those are the degrees being talked about when people talk of "pointless" degrees. A degree in English from Cambridge is never going to be pointless is it? But, and apologies if I hit anyone with this stray bullet, but a degree in Film and TV Studies from the University[sic] of Northampton (ranked 94th by the Guardian University guide) is, imo, a waste of both three years and ?10k in tuition fees. If you want to work in the media a job as a runner will be your entry point and you learn on the job. Whilst the time at the university is undoubtably useful for learning about "life" as well as your subject I'm not sure the state should be paying for it. If university remained a preserve of the "intellectual elite", ensuring only small numbers of students gained highly valued degrees from respected institutions, then it could remain fully funded by central government. Caroline Lucas, the Green Party MP, also makes the case for a tax on those businesses who will hire graduates and benefit from them as an alternative means of funding.

Pinko. "Get some nuts" MacGabhann! Or try and concentrate on beating my Doodle Jump score on the iphone. Currently stands at 36000. Anyone else?

Dulwich & Sydenham woods begin at the top of Lordship Lane. That's pretty impressive open-space for zone2.

Still does. Harveys. Lovely drop.

I can only speak from my own viewpoint and background - whilst my family were far from "well off" we were always comfortable. Clothes on back, food on table etc, domestic holiday once a year etc. I was the first person in my immediate family who had been to university and there was some pressure to do so. I went to a decent if unspectacular red-brick and did a decent social-science degree and got a decent mark. Tuition fees had been introduced in 1997 and I started uni in 2001 so close enough that I felt hard done by. My parents paid my tuition fees (approx. ?1k pa if I remember) and topped up my student loan to cover living costs. I still graduated with about ?14k of debt. Now, whilst I am, in principle, opposed to further increases (or tuition fees at all) I never really think about that debt now. I'm now standing on my own two feet and making my way in the world. Each month a small amount comes out of my pay packet and goes towards paying it off. Each year I get a statement. It's just another form of tax for me along with PAYE, NI, my pension, my union subs, my civil service sports membership and my cycle scheme loan. I never see the money so I don't know any different. So....I'm not sure whether this increase in fees will put people off. If they are that poor they get subsidies anyway and more student loan. At the end of three years, ?14k, ?25k or ?40k....does it really matter. Each month you pay a little bit and when you earn more, you pay more, just like income tax. I agree with LB that a return in the standard of teaching needs to be addressed and I agree that an arbitary figure of 50% going to university is daft. University should be elitist, but only in terms of intelligence. Going to uni off the back of two D's at A-Level to study meedja for 3 years is a waste. 3 years in the world of work will do far more for you. And whilst uni is about far more than learning, that isn't an excuse for the state to fund three years of personal development. A complicated picture.

I blame Sean and his constant Marxist agit-prop. Don't listen to his Lysenkoist diatribes on homeopathy! He's undoubtably a neo-con agent-provocateur undermining the cause from within. A Stalinist purge will commence forthwith.

Bravo all. Well done. But, along with stance on Chinese medicine, I've had a re-think. Clearly it is me with the problem. Why, only the other day I managed to walk a whole 200yds without craving a some toasted bread with cheese (TM Louisa 2009). Why, oh why, I cried can there not be another pizzeria right where I am NOW. Why do I have to walk all of 300yds to find one. Life is not fair. The denizens of East Dulwich demand MORE pizza. Avante!

And just what/who is "Albany"? And how did Ruth's hands heal so fast last night? One minute she was melting them on an iron, the next minute in hospital she doesn't even have a plaster on and is heading back to work. God, she's tough.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > COME ON DAVID!! Stop back-peddling and changing > your argument! Do you still believe that Chinese > herbal medicine is only a placebo, and will never > contain an effective active ingredient? No. I will admit that this was a rash and ill chosen opening remark. TCM products can sometimes contain an active ingredient. Placebo no doubt plays a part, but it does so in many other forms of medicine too. I should have instead concentrated on the inherent dangers it presents, the ill founded logic upon which it is based, the unchecked results it produces, the unlicensed practitioners who espouse it and the vast superiority of western, EBM. The mere presence of an active ingredient does not suddenly produce a medical system that should be trusted or relied upon. I am happy to admit that further investigation, using thorough scientific practices, into Chinese herbs may yield some positive results. Huguenot also articulates my thoughts. Probably better than I can.

I would imagine it would be highly relevent, Anna. If you were actively, or had previously, imbibed any TCM rememedies you could use it as personal anecdote. Perhaps it worked for you. You could be forgiven for defending it. But you're not. And never have. So it doesn't matter. It's not that I'm choosing not to understand you - I just disagree with you. Vigorously. And I'm not convinced by the idea that because TCM contains an active ingredient it shouldn't be dismissed as woo. I'm fully aware of the sources of western pharmaceuticals. Vast swathes are derived from natural flora. Some may come from China. Others come from all over the world....the Amazon being a particularly rich source. But no one suggests that "Traditional Amahuaca Medicine" should be credited with anything like the nonsensical mysticism TCM is given. Just because a load of chaps with wooden plates in their face use this stuff (and have done for xthousand years) doesn't mean I'm about to go licking the backs of frogs. Without the little old Chinese women behind the desk, and an unexplained western habit of imbuing anything vaguely "oriental" with some sort of overhyped sense of power and complexity, TCM would be seen for pseudo-medical bobbins it really is.

From the little counter-top oven-thing? Really? We may have to just agree to differ. Apart from on Hoopers itself.

Anna....as a medical doctor, what would you recommend to Narnia - would you refer him to a TCM practioner? Or to his nearest GP and pharmacist? Do you yourself take TCM products? And if you talk really....slowly. In short sentences. I might. Just. Understand.

Taper - that made me properly chuckle. :))

Best rugby pub imo is Hoopers on Ivanhoe Road. The landlord, Jamie, is a massive rugby fan and has two screens showing the action. He also has an excellent range of beers. The only let down is a lack of food. Last time I went the only offerings were some ropey pies and sausage rolls.

Minkey - that's a misleading statement. You're framing it as if you just take the herb as dished out by TCM practioners. That's simply not true. Reading the article, medical doctors and researchers, through rigorous testing, have extracted certain enzymes. That's hardly mystical Chinese herbalism. That's hardcore western science.

To all who have highlighted my errorin the number of years require for medical training - many apologies. Clearly my general point was lost in a myopia of pedantry. But thank you nonetheless. By the way.... I'm travelling to Vietnam in a months time and need some vaccines. My doctor tells me typhoid is needed but I reckon some elderly chinese women in a shop can do better. Could anyone tell me which herbs to take to avoid a fatal contagious disease? Thanks in advance, Tosser.

I'm not ignoring you anna. I'm out having dinner and have other things to do. Maybe tomorrow eh?