Matthew Byng-Maddick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 14 May 2001, David Cantrell wrote:
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 12:11:13PM +, Steve Mynott wrote:
Well one advantage of BP or Shell is if you don't like either company
then you can simply choose not to purchase their products.
So
Piers Cawley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I respectfully suggest that we don't train the little buggers in
schools. We teach them stuff.
Wrong. We show them how to learn.
--
Dave Hodgkinson, http://www.hodgkinson.org
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star
on 14/5/01 9:24 pm, Robin Szemeti wrote:
What the hell happened to the youth that did amusing things with steam
engines, collected stamps and had a chemistry set? .. give a 16 year old
a chemistry set today and they'd try and inject it.
They seem to have taken anything remotely fun out of
Martin Ling [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Exactly. This is the same population that brought you 'Hey, why are
there loads of schools with below average results!'
That was a direct quote. Tory education minister. We want to raise
standard so that more than half of schools get above average
Roger Burton West [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 02:10:56PM -0400, Piers Cawley wrote:
And while I'm about it, can I please kill anyone who complains that
our universities are 'too elitist?'. Excuse me? I thought that was the
whole point.
Oh, that's easy.
- Being
Dave Hodgkinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Martin Ling [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Exactly. This is the same population that brought you 'Hey, why are
there loads of schools with below average results!'
That was a direct quote. Tory education minister. We want to raise
standard so that
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 06:10:12PM -0400, Piers Cawley wrote:
Well, it's thinking like that that keeps the skills gap nice and wide.
Hmm... can't be all bad then.
Better to quietly allow immigrants across the border, put them in
an immigration armlock and then turn a blind eye to them be
On Mon, 14 May 2001, you wrote:
But it does mean you need some
really AWFUL schools to pull the average down...
AIUI suitable arrangments have been put in place to enable this to happen.
--
Robin Szemeti
The box said requires windows 95 or better
So I installed Linux!
Robin Szemeti [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 14 May 2001, you wrote:
But it does mean you need some
really AWFUL schools to pull the average down...
AIUI suitable arrangments have been put in place to enable this to
happen.
I intended to leave that implicit.
--
Piers Cawley
Paul Makepeace [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth:
*``BOFHs will legally need licence to work''
*
*http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/7/18866.html
*
*Absurd, laughable and bizarre. What *is* wrong with the UK?
I interviewed for a firewall admin job at a big bank whereupon they took a
microscope to the
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 03:30:31AM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/7/18866.html
Absurd, laughable and bizarre. What *is* wrong with the UK?
Don't ask me, you elected 'em. And it looks like you're all stupid enough
to do it *again*.
--
Pray to God, but keep
At 15:27 13/05/2001, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 03:30:31AM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/7/18866.html
Absurd, laughable and bizarre. What *is* wrong with the UK?
Don't ask me, you elected 'em. And it looks like you're all stupid enough
to
* Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
At 15:27 13/05/2001, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 03:30:31AM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/7/18866.html
Absurd, laughable and bizarre. What *is* wrong with the UK?
Don't ask me, you elected 'em.
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 03:45:21PM +0100, Dave Cross wrote:
But given that the Socialist Alliance are only standing in ~100
constituencies, there doesn't seem to be any credible alternative.
http://www.socialistalliance.net/constituencies/constitlist.htm for the
complete list.
--
David
* David Cantrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 03:45:21PM +0100, Dave Cross wrote:
But given that the Socialist Alliance are only standing in ~100
constituencies, there doesn't seem to be any credible alternative.
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 05:22:49PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
ok i reserve the right to quit this thread at any time, however
But hasn't `new' labour's example shown that there is no place for
socialism in modern government? Hasn't their move to capitalism been
really a well spun
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 05:22:49PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
How can any socialist not feel that when it came to the crunch socialism was
rejected by intelligent people who understood its principals and benefits
intimitadly because they could see it would not work for modern Britain?
Which
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 05:35:24PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
Do the Lib Dems think along these lines? No-one knows cos the LDs have
never seemed to have any policies ever.
Actually, I like the idea of parties which don't have any policies. They're
supposed to represent what we tell them to
At 17:22 13/05/2001, Greg McCarroll wrote:
* David Cantrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 03:45:21PM +0100, Dave Cross wrote:
But given that the Socialist Alliance are only standing in ~100
constituencies, there doesn't seem to be any credible alternative.
* Simon Cozens ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 05:22:49PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
How can any socialist not feel that when it came to the crunch socialism was
rejected by intelligent people who understood its principals and benefits
intimitadly because they could
At 17:38 13/05/2001, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 05:22:49PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
How can any socialist not feel that when it came to the crunch
socialism was
rejected by intelligent people who understood its principals and benefits
intimitadly because they could
* Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I've gathered from the conversations I've had with people here, the vast
majority of us tend towards the left[1].
I'm not sure i tend to either side, i don't really like the party system
of being a named outlook on the world. But i don't have
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 05:42:00PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 05:35:24PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
Do the Lib Dems think along these lines? No-one knows cos the LDs have
never seemed to have any policies ever.
Actually, I like the idea of parties which don't
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:30:44PM +0100, Martin Ling wrote:
Hey, what if we had a system where we just elected a *candidate* we
liked, like one for each local area or something? Pretty crazy, huh?
Democracy? In this country? It wouldn't work.
Democracy is overrated. I think a meritocracy is
* Martin Ling ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 05:42:00PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 05:35:24PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
Do the Lib Dems think along these lines? No-one knows cos the LDs have
never seemed to have any policies ever.
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:38:45PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
Democracy is overrated. I think a meritocracy is needed. Perhaps measured by
Perl competence.
It's a fairly well-arguable stance that *any* form of meritocracy is a
reasonable system - certainly an improvement on, for example, a
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:44:07PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
Hey, what if we had a system where we just elected a *candidate* we
liked, like one for each local area or something? Pretty crazy, huh?
It'll never work remember the people outside the M25 get a vote as well,
and we don't
101 - 127 of 127 matches
Mail list logo
