Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Okay, then, my view is I want to see more detail and concrete plans.

£500 million a year sounds like a lot, but the government spent the past 35 years dismantling the moderately good vocational secondary/tertiary system the UK used to have in order to get everyone into second-rate academic programmes. Therefore they need to do a 270 degree turn to get to the kind of excellent system the Germans have had for decades for technical/vocational education.

I'm not sure this is going to happen easily and smoothly, especially since the government has spent the past 35 years also fiddling around with secondary/tertiary academic education and not doing a whole lot of good there.

And who is going to pay?

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
What, honestly, can Russia do to an independent Scotland without international response? And why would they? It's England that is their "enemy". Now I wouldn't say that they could get away with no miitary, but they could certainly get away with a very small military, being protected by being land-locked and positioning. Unless England tries to invade, but somehow I doubt that will happen.

Have you heard of this new fangled modern invention called Fighter jets? Russia is quite fond of sending them to probe other countries airspaces, its like a national past time of theirs.

And, again, what does that actually do, besides allow Russia to band their chest? Unless, of course, you are suggesting Russia is going to start bombing Scotland. And if you read what I wrote, I said they can get away with a small military.

So you're OK with Russia flying military aircraft with impunity over Alaska and the West Coast?

I'll be honest, I don't really give a gak about them buzzing out airspace. They shouldn't but it doesn't actually do anything. It's the equivalent of chest-banging, and they do stuff like it all the time. And for small country like Scotland, they would only need a small number of jets to "protect" themselves from it. Again, I this is like the fifth time I've said this Small not none.

Buzzing is a military pastime, and whoever thinks we (we as in NATO) don't do it is clearly delusional. This is from a couple years back, but happens almost every other week. It's probably just NATO got used to RuAF not having gas money for quite a few years.

https://warisboring.com/u-s-spy-plane-reportedly-violated-swedish-air-space-to-escape-russian-fighters-424d05e11bd5#.qgnezqkjv

I know a few people at the Spanish AF and we get constantly buzzed by Algeria, Morocco and (back in the day) Libya. You intercept them, wave at them cockpit to cockpit then go back.

In times of lower Russian activity NATO fighters used to intercept each other just to keep those military muscles fit.

Regarding Scotland, Russia, etc., even minus UK the EU still has a defence budget over twice that of the Russians. There's not going to be a shooting war, and if it would happen the European armies are more than capable of waging a defensive war in their own turf.

Russia has taken three years to consolidate conquest of the Crimea (an area it used to own and that has a sizeable Russian or pro-Russian population), and be aggressive at the Ukraine.

It's a pretty dodgy country -- at least as bad as the UK or USA for invading other places with minimal or no provocation. But it's not going to be conquering Scotland any time soon.

Russia isn't going to invade Scotland. Or England. Or the USA. Or Norway, Sweden etc.

And if that's the best argument you can come up with against Scottish Independance, I'd volunteer you've already lost the argument?

Two arguments I can think against Scottish Independence. If they leave the UK they've got two choices: jump into the EU or stay completely independent. If they do the former that means accepting the Euro, the ECJ, the Schengen Area and all the rest of the EU's baggage. That's hardly independence. The latter means having to have a serious think about their finances. The NHS, free universities, defense. Oil isn't what it used to be.

The UK has it's problems but I think they're fixable. It's a union that's largely worked, and for a very long time too.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
To get back to current affairs, what does the panel think of the Chancellor's slightly vague plans to reform vocational secondary and tertiary education over the next few years?

The usual waffle, pie in the sky, tinkering at the edges that has blighted education in this country for years.

Numeracy, literacy, all are in decline. The three L's have went to the dogs.

A declining education system is the least of our problems. Like I said earlier, criminal gangs roam the streets with impunity, prisoners are taking over prisons. The NHS is at breaking point, and we can't even escape to the country because England's green and pleasant land is under attack from a huge increase in fly tipping, arson, illegal dumping, and tractors and livestock getting rustled!

The country is going to hell in a hog cart!

Strangely, PM May seems immune to the fallout, despite her party being in government for the last 7 years...




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Two arguments I can think against Scottish Independence. If they leave the UK they've got two choices: jump into the EU or stay completely independent. If they do the former that means accepting the Euro, the ECJ, the Schengen Area and all the rest of the EU's baggage. That's hardly independence. The latter means having to have a serious think about their finances. The NHS, free universities, defense. Oil isn't what it used to be.

The UK has it's problems but I think they're fixable. It's a union that's largely worked, and for a very long time too.

See my above post. The nation's going to the dogs! To say that the UK has its problems is an understatement!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Russia isn't going to invade Scotland. Or England. Or the USA. Or Norway, Sweden etc.

And if that's the best argument you can come up with against Scottish Independance, I'd volunteer you've already lost the argument?

The day Russia invades Scotland is the same day I join the Conservative party and get a picture of David Cameron tattooed on my chest!

Here you go.

Go get that tattoo!

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/scotland-targeted-russian-invasion-moscow-6534344.amp

 welshhoppo wrote:
Here you go.

Go get that tattoo!

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/scotland-targeted-russian-invasion-moscow-6534344.amp

I'm talking an actual invasion with T-55 tanks rumbling through the streets of Glasgow, MIGs flying over head etc etc

A Russian propaganda channel doesn't count!

I think Russia is well past the T-55 now!

 Future War Cultist wrote:
I think Russia is well past the T-55 now!

I'm not up to date on my post-WW2 Russian tanks, but the point remains the same.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Russia isn't going to invade Scotland. Or England. Or the USA. Or Norway, Sweden etc.

And if that's the best argument you can come up with against Scottish Independance, I'd volunteer you've already lost the argument?

Who said its an argument against Scottish independence?

Its an argument against an independent scotland spending nothing on its own defence and security, and expecting other nations to defend them.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Russia isn't going to invade Scotland. Or England. Or the USA. Or Norway, Sweden etc.

And if that's the best argument you can come up with against Scottish Independance, I'd volunteer you've already lost the argument?

Who said its an argument against Scottish independence?

Its an argument against an independent scotland spending nothing on its own defence and security, and expecting other nations to defend them.

The defence plans for an independent Scotland will be similar to other comparative nations such as Denmark and Norway.

Plus, Edinburgh will be forwarding an application to join NATO as well, so defence is covered.

Plus, as part of any deal, Scotland is 10% of the UK, so is entitled to 10% of the UK's defence assets in the event of independence.

We might be able to grab a few destroyers or something

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The three L's have went to the dogs.

English as she should be spoke proper!

 Graphite wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The three L's have went to the dogs.

English as she should be spoke proper!

I'm trying my best not to come across as your average Daily Mail reader, but the country isn't what it was, and I'm not talking about the switch from VHS to DVD!

Decline is in the air....

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Graphite wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The three L's have went to the dogs.

English as she should be spoke proper!

I'm trying my best not to come across as your average Daily Mail reader, but the country isn't what it was, and I'm not talking about the switch from VHS to DVD!

Decline is in the air....

Is Decline Kim Kardashians new perfume?

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Graphite wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The three L's have went to the dogs.

English as she should be spoke proper!

I'm trying my best not to come across as your average Daily Mail reader, but the country isn't what it was, and I'm not talking about the switch from VHS to DVD!

Decline is in the air....

Is Decline Kim Kardashians new perfume?

No!

On a serious note, Brexit is the golden opportunity that comes along in a nation's history maybe once every 200 years. The last time Britain had an opportunity like this was back in the days of Pitt the Younger and the industrial revolution.

I've banged the drum before, but if we as a nation agreed a mega plan, took a long hard look at ourselves and asked how best do we deal with the challenges of the 21st century, then I'd feel confident.

Instead, we get the slide into mediocrity, the business as usual approach from a party who thinks that if they bung the Arabs a few crates of rifles and a fighter jet, flog the NHS to any passing billionaire, then all will be well...but it won't...

Wait.

Are you saying that the industrial revolution was used as an opportunity to improve this country, and to plan for the future while building fantastic infrastructure, rather than several people managing to make themselves extraordinarily rich by dumping the rest of us into something barely a step above indentured servitude?

 Graphite wrote:
Wait.

Are you saying that the industrial revolution was used as an opportunity to improve this country, and to plan for the future while building fantastic infrastructure, rather than several people managing to make themselves extraordinarily rich by dumping the rest of us into something barely a step above indentured servitude?

The working conditions were horrendous - I'm not defending that.

But the revolution game us saturated rail networks from Land's End to John O'Groats, the world's first underground railway in London, the London sewage system, thousands of miles of canals, factories, buildings, civic projects, statues, infrastructure coming out of our rears...you name it.

Say what you want about the Victorians but their enthusiasm for building stuff is badly needed in this day and age.

Compare that to modern Britain. Try and put up a picket fence and you'll face 10 legal challenges, bloody environmentalists, NIMBYs and people banging on about the Green Belt

We're going backwards, we're going to the dogs....

 Graphite wrote:
Wait.

Are you saying that the industrial revolution was used as an opportunity to improve this country, and to plan for the future while building fantastic infrastructure, rather than several people managing to make themselves extraordinarily rich by dumping the rest of us into something barely a step above indentured servitude?

It depends on the person involve. Some people did and some people didn't. Not everyone was a bastard during the IR.

No, true. And some people did try to do things to improve other folks lives (I think New Lanark had quite a lot of this sort of thing going on). But a lot of that infrastructure was built by private enterprise, to make money.

And a lot of the civic projects were due to philanthropy rather than any centralised plan. How much of that philanthropy was due to wanting to do something good, and how much of it was due to wanting to have your name on a building/bridge/library I don't know, and most likely a mix of the two.

But I don't believe that there was some grand centralised plan to make the country work better when a wonderful opportunity presented itself.

Don't get me wrong. There should be. And it should be done regardless of Brexit or any other such nonsense.

We remember Hadrian because he built things all over the Roman Empire, including a bloody great wall in the North of England!

We need to take a leaf out of Hadrian's book and build build build.

Better roads for moving goods from the factory to the ports.

Better housing for the people making the stuff,

and saturated broadband coverage for the digital age.

Simple stuff. And yet, the nation that invented modern civil nuclear power has to go cap in hand to the French and the Chinese for a new nuclear power station.

Build one ourselves. And solve the housing crisis, and gak poor roads, and so on...

If I can see it, why the hell can't government?

If we are to be this great trading nation post-Brexit, we need the foundations in place.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
I think Russia is well past the T-55 now!

I'm not up to date on my post-WW2 Russian tanks, but the point remains the same.

T-90s mostly, although it doesn't have gak on the Challenger 2 and the M1A2 Abrams.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

On a serious note, Brexit is the golden opportunity that comes along in a nation's history maybe once every 200 years. The last time Britain had an opportunity like this was back in the days of Pitt the Younger and the industrial revolution.

I've banged the drum before, but if we as a nation agreed a mega plan, took a long hard look at ourselves and asked how best do we deal with the challenges of the 21st century, then I'd feel confident.

Instead, we get the slide into mediocrity, the business as usual approach from a party who thinks that if they bung the Arabs a few crates of rifles and a fighter jet, flog the NHS to any passing billionaire, then all will be well...but it won't...

I don't quite get this; if we had some sort of plan (mega or not) to revolutionise anything, why would we be unable to do so whilst being part of the EU?
You could argue that the EU has been pushing for changes from the status quo and we've been resisting them.

I agree with you though; we need massive infrastucture projects to bring us back up to 2nd rate and maybe even lead the world again. New railways, trains, road links, cities, renewable energy, house building and so on. Our infrastructure seems to be just about coping, but is pitiful compared to a lot of places.

Herzlos wrote:

I don't quite get this; if we had some sort of plan (mega or not) to revolutionise anything, why would we be unable to do so whilst being part of the EU?
You could argue that the EU has been pushing for changes from the status quo and we've been resisting them.

The EU had some fairly strict laws around governments interfering in the market, it's always been one of their more unappetising neo-liberal aspects. They're devoutly committed against any serious forms of socialism, state subsidies, or indeed, state production of any kind. Completely open markets are the name of the game; it's why Corbyn spent years railing against them and barely raised a whisper at us leaving. If we didn't, most of what's on his manifesto would be illegal.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but none of the things you mentioned that we should do would require anyone to interfere with the markets? You're mostly talking about actually spending some money on infrastructure.

From what I've ascertained, DINLT tends to be thinking a spot beyond that; for example he talks about building nuclear plants ourselves. That would involve setting up several nuclear research and production facilities. These would in turn require state support and guaranteed markets, which would in turn force out the franchises which currently bid to service the UK market.

To take another example, it's been mentioned a few times that the NHS should just produce their own generic drugs instead of relying on expensive external supply. A state pharmaceutical company would inevitably be directly subsidised and thus run directly up against EU anti-competitive laws.

For a third example, building large scale railway infrastructure requires meeting several components of EU law to do with pollution, environmental impact analysis, and so forth. Any mass compulsory purchase orders to acquire the necessary land is also made more expensive by the fact that the government cannot set a price regarded as too unreasonable lest it be thrown towards the European courts. Note that I am not saying these specific things are bad things, merely pointing out that they do exist, and they do inhibit the sort of large scale infrastructure projects envisioned by DINLT.

Frankly, I do think that we could do with a spot more socialism in the market than the EU permits generally speaking. It actively works to limit the disturbing influence governments can possess upon industry, with the reasoning that the free market does most things best. But as has been pointed out before, such actions may well result in a bigger cake, but when all the extra goes to the same few people, it feels somewhat pointless.

https://politicalscrapbook.net/2017/03/350m-a-week-extra-this-millionnaire-tory-lord-wants-to-cut-nhs-spending/


..any day now we'll be told in fact there was no bus.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

But the revolution game us saturated rail networks from Land's End to John O'Groats, the world's first underground railway in London, the London sewage system, thousands of miles of canals, factories, buildings, civic projects, statues, infrastructure coming out of our rears...you name it.

All of which were built on the profits of a global empire. Times have very much changed.

Infrastructure is something that should always be invested in of course but simply building motorways (or whatever) isn't going to improve education or fix the pension timebomb..

The country isn't "going to the dogs" either, that's the sort of shitey hyperbole that I would expect to read in some awful rag like the Express. There are indeed some huge issues within and without the country and things are getting worse (or at least not getting better) but the sky is not going to be falling.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

But the revolution game us saturated rail networks from Land's End to John O'Groats, the world's first underground railway in London, the London sewage system, thousands of miles of canals, factories, buildings, civic projects, statues, infrastructure coming out of our rears...you name it.

All of which were built on the profits of a global empire. Times have very much changed.

Infrastructure is something that should always be invested in of course but simply building motorways (or whatever) isn't going to improve education or fix the pension timebomb..

The country isn't "going to the dogs" either, that's the sort of shitey hyperbole that I would expect to read in some awful rag like the Express. There are indeed some huge issues within and without the country and things are getting worse (or at least not getting better) but the sky is not going to be falling.

Building Infrastructure could improve education by employing apprentices to do the work or at least give people more experience. Such projects create jobs which is good for the economy, heck we have an overcrowded prison service! Why don't we get the criminals working on resurfacing the roads and picking vegetables in the fields - put them to good use I say. That would free up more trades peoples to work on more projects without huge costs. The problem with this country is too many places are changing too fast and too few places are catching up to where the aforementioned ones were. We need a drive to invest in ourselves and be self-sufficient, that is where the finance economy has made us go wrong. Just look at the imploding Vauxhall debacle! If we produced more parts rather than imported them Peugeot would probably give a damn about the factories here. Its plainly obvious that they will cease production once GMs committed contracts run out because it is cheaper to build them without having to import parts inside Europe, probably in France knowing the French. Of course this is prime Brexit-is-a-killer material. I agree certain aspects of this country is going to the dogs.

 Sentinel1 wrote:
That would free up more trades peoples to work on more projects without huge costs.

So turn unskilled labour into skilled labour by wishing really, really hard?