Preparing hard workers for a future of tax paying...

[JB!]

Twincam16 said:

Happened with the railways too - we invented the things. Nowadays because of cost-cutting we don't even lay the tracks properly, welding the rails together rather than allowing for heat expansion, then they buckle in the heat delaying summer services. Compare our railways to those in France or Japan. It's pathetic.

actually, we weld the rails together to prevent buckles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuously_welded_r...

its a far better process, less succeptable to breakages, smoother riding and easier to renew than jointed track. it also reduces voiding and cyclic top.

CWR will only buckle if the Stress Free Temperature is too low, or the track has not been prepared for summer by increasing retaining ballast shoulders, installing lateral resistance plates, lubricating joints and re-stressing to a suitable SFT.

anyhow, if you want to know more, start a thread in boats, planes an trains and i'll do my best to answer any questions.

[Twincam16]

JB! said:

Twincam16 said:

Happened with the railways too - we invented the things. Nowadays because of cost-cutting we don't even lay the tracks properly, welding the rails together rather than allowing for heat expansion, then they buckle in the heat delaying summer services. Compare our railways to those in France or Japan. It's pathetic.

actually, we weld the rails together to prevent buckles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuously_welded_r...

its a far better process, less succeptable to breakages, smoother riding and easier to renew than jointed track. it also reduces voiding and cyclic top.

CWR will only buckle if the Stress Free Temperature is too low, or the track has not been prepared for summer by increasing retaining ballast shoulders, installing lateral resistance plates, lubricating joints and re-stressing to a suitable SFT.

anyhow, if you want to know more, start a thread in boats, planes an trains and i'll do my best to answer any questions.

Bloody platform announcers lied!

[prand]

Twincam16 said:

prand said:

Willie Dee said:

As long as the school works both ways, as in half the time a handful of really incompetent arrogant kids get A* simply because of who their daddy is where as the rest of the class are restricted to the grade of C+ or below no matter how hard they work because they were not fortunate enough to be born into the right family.

How does this work then? Is this streaming in schools where the pushy parents get their kids into classes that will make sure the kids do all the modules to get maximum marks? And the kids with "poor," non-pushy parents don't know/care about this so clever or not they get stuck in streams where maximum grades aren't achievable?

I think he was making the point of 'it's not what you know, it's who you know'.

It's also, increasingly, 'who can put you up in London free of charge for a year'.

Seriously, there are several jobs out there that you can only get to the top of if you've spent a year doing unpaid work experience, almost invariably in London, and in order to do that you need either very wealthy parents, or friends or relatives willing to take you in, house, feed and clothe you without a single penny in return.

There is also the issue of 'who you went to school with'. I went to a comprehensive school so I don't know the kids of any peers or captains of industry, but I went to university with several people who did. We got comparable degrees. Guess how they got their first jobs?

Yes I see that - but i'm not clear how this applies to schools and doing exams? How does a dad, apart from providing drive to the supposedly talentles kid at home, and influence over the teachers to make sure they give them the right attention (which any parent can do), actually influence exam results? You all do the same exams, or do you?

[JB!]

Twincam16 said:

JB! said:

Twincam16 said:

Happened with the railways too - we invented the things. Nowadays because of cost-cutting we don't even lay the tracks properly, welding the rails together rather than allowing for heat expansion, then they buckle in the heat delaying summer services. Compare our railways to those in France or Japan. It's pathetic.

actually, we weld the rails together to prevent buckles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuously_welded_r...

its a far better process, less succeptable to breakages, smoother riding and easier to renew than jointed track. it also reduces voiding and cyclic top.

CWR will only buckle if the Stress Free Temperature is too low, or the track has not been prepared for summer by increasing retaining ballast shoulders, installing lateral resistance plates, lubricating joints and re-stressing to a suitable SFT.

anyhow, if you want to know more, start a thread in boats, planes an trains and i'll do my best to answer any questions.

Bloody platform announcers lied!

always.

i was on MK platform last winter and they claimed the points were frozen, which is why the train was late, i rung my boss, we had de-iced and checked operation of all points an hour earlier, turns out a train driver was "too snowed in" to get to work...

... platform announcers = liars 95% of the time.

[Willie Dee]

prand said:

Yes I see that - but i'm not clear how this applies to schools and doing exams? How does a dad, apart from providing drive to the supposedly talentles kid at home, and influence over the teachers to make sure they give them the right attention (which any parent can do), actually influence exam results? You all do the same exams, or do you?

[Twincam16]

prand said:

Twincam16 said:

prand said:

Willie Dee said:

As long as the school works both ways, as in half the time a handful of really incompetent arrogant kids get A* simply because of who their daddy is where as the rest of the class are restricted to the grade of C+ or below no matter how hard they work because they were not fortunate enough to be born into the right family.

How does this work then? Is this streaming in schools where the pushy parents get their kids into classes that will make sure the kids do all the modules to get maximum marks? And the kids with "poor," non-pushy parents don't know/care about this so clever or not they get stuck in streams where maximum grades aren't achievable?

I think he was making the point of 'it's not what you know, it's who you know'.

It's also, increasingly, 'who can put you up in London free of charge for a year'.

Seriously, there are several jobs out there that you can only get to the top of if you've spent a year doing unpaid work experience, almost invariably in London, and in order to do that you need either very wealthy parents, or friends or relatives willing to take you in, house, feed and clothe you without a single penny in return.

There is also the issue of 'who you went to school with'. I went to a comprehensive school so I don't know the kids of any peers or captains of industry, but I went to university with several people who did. We got comparable degrees. Guess how they got their first jobs?

Yes I see that - but i'm not clear how this applies to schools and doing exams? How does a dad, apart from providing drive to the supposedly talentles kid at home, and influence over the teachers to make sure they give them the right attention (which any parent can do), actually influence exam results? You all do the same exams, or do you?

What Willie Dee meant by 'really incompetant arrogant kids who get an A* because of who their daddy is' was the kids who aren't that brilliant academically, but who are made up for life in terms of jobs and money regardless of actual talent because their Dad is either someone with their own firm who will employ them regardless, or someone well-connected who knows someone who will. It's a figurative A* for someone who doesn't have to try.

The 'restricted to C+ no matter how hard they work because they weren't born into the right family' is a metaphor for kids who may be very bright indeed and who may go onto a good university degree, but as I outlined above, can't make it work for them because they don't have a family that can put its hand in its pocket and support them living in London without income for a year, or have them parachuted straight into the right job because they know the chief executive.

[rich1231]

Twincam16 said:

prand said:

Twincam16 said:

prand said:

Willie Dee said:

As long as the school works both ways, as in half the time a handful of really incompetent arrogant kids get A* simply because of who their daddy is where as the rest of the class are restricted to the grade of C+ or below no matter how hard they work because they were not fortunate enough to be born into the right family.

How does this work then? Is this streaming in schools where the pushy parents get their kids into classes that will make sure the kids do all the modules to get maximum marks? And the kids with "poor," non-pushy parents don't know/care about this so clever or not they get stuck in streams where maximum grades aren't achievable?

I think he was making the point of 'it's not what you know, it's who you know'.

It's also, increasingly, 'who can put you up in London free of charge for a year'.

Seriously, there are several jobs out there that you can only get to the top of if you've spent a year doing unpaid work experience, almost invariably in London, and in order to do that you need either very wealthy parents, or friends or relatives willing to take you in, house, feed and clothe you without a single penny in return.

There is also the issue of 'who you went to school with'. I went to a comprehensive school so I don't know the kids of any peers or captains of industry, but I went to university with several people who did. We got comparable degrees. Guess how they got their first jobs?

Yes I see that - but i'm not clear how this applies to schools and doing exams? How does a dad, apart from providing drive to the supposedly talentles kid at home, and influence over the teachers to make sure they give them the right attention (which any parent can do), actually influence exam results? You all do the same exams, or do you?

What Willie Dee meant by 'really incompetant arrogant kids who get an A* because of who their daddy is' was the kids who aren't that brilliant academically, but who are made up for life in terms of jobs and money regardless of actual talent because their Dad is either someone with their own firm who will employ them regardless, or someone well-connected who knows someone who will. It's a figurative A* for someone who doesn't have to try.

The 'restricted to C+ no matter how hard they work because they weren't born into the right family' is a metaphor for kids who may be very bright indeed and who may go onto a good university degree, but as I outlined above, can't make it work for them because they don't have a family that can put its hand in its pocket and support them living in London without income for a year, or have them parachuted straight into the right job because they know the chief executive.

Will you stop bleating please. Life is unfair, get over it.

[Willie Dee]

rich1231 said:

Will you stop bleating please. Life is unfair, get over it.

Life is indeed unfair, and its nice we have progressed over the years as a society to recognise that fact and tax people accordingly. A small token to attempt to even the odds just a little bit to make life worth living to those not born into wealth.

[rich1231]

Willie Dee said:

rich1231 said:

Will you stop bleating please. Life is unfair, get over it.

Life is indeed unfair, and its nice we have progressed over the years as a society to recognise that fact and tax people accordingly. A small token to attempt to even the odds just a little bit to make life worth living to those not born into wealth.

Is live worth living for you?

Really is it not?

How many millions of suicides do we have each year in the UK with life not worth living as the excuse?

[Timmy35]

Willie Dee said:

rich1231 said:

Will you stop bleating please. Life is unfair, get over it.

Life is indeed unfair, and its nice we have progressed over the years as a society to recognise that fact and tax people accordingly. A small token to attempt to even the odds just a little bit to make life worth living to those not born into wealth.

It has the effect of ensuring that those who are from poor backgrounds never have a chance to accumulate the wealth of those who are born with wealth, because the harder they work the more the state confiscates, presently upto 50%.

The taxation system keeps the less well off, less well off. It does absolutely nothing to resolve social inequality what so ever.

[JB!]

Timmy35 said:

Willie Dee said:

rich1231 said:

Will you stop bleating please. Life is unfair, get over it.

Life is indeed unfair, and its nice we have progressed over the years as a society to recognise that fact and tax people accordingly. A small token to attempt to even the odds just a little bit to make life worth living to those not born into wealth.

It has the effect of ensuring that those who are from poor backgrounds never have a chance to accumulate the wealth of those who are born with wealth, because the harder they work the more the state confiscates, presently upto 50%.

The taxation system keeps the less well off, less well off. It does absolutely nothing to resolve social inequality what so ever.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS SOCIAL EQUALITY.

the sooner perople realise this, the better.
there is ALWAYS someone at the bottom and ALWAYS someone at the top.

[Timmy35]

JB! said:

Timmy35 said:

Willie Dee said:

rich1231 said:

Will you stop bleating please. Life is unfair, get over it.

Life is indeed unfair, and its nice we have progressed over the years as a society to recognise that fact and tax people accordingly. A small token to attempt to even the odds just a little bit to make life worth living to those not born into wealth.

It has the effect of ensuring that those who are from poor backgrounds never have a chance to accumulate the wealth of those who are born with wealth, because the harder they work the more the state confiscates, presently upto 50%.

The taxation system keeps the less well off, less well off. It does absolutely nothing to resolve social inequality what so ever.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS SOCIAL EQUALITY.

the sooner perople realise this, the better.
there is ALWAYS someone at the bottom and ALWAYS someone at the top.

Where in my post did I say there was?

[JB!]

Timmy35 said:

JB! said:

Timmy35 said:

Willie Dee said:

rich1231 said:

Will you stop bleating please. Life is unfair, get over it.

Life is indeed unfair, and its nice we have progressed over the years as a society to recognise that fact and tax people accordingly. A small token to attempt to even the odds just a little bit to make life worth living to those not born into wealth.

It has the effect of ensuring that those who are from poor backgrounds never have a chance to accumulate the wealth of those who are born with wealth, because the harder they work the more the state confiscates, presently upto 50%.

The taxation system keeps the less well off, less well off. It does absolutely nothing to resolve social inequality what so ever.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS SOCIAL EQUALITY.

the sooner perople realise this, the better.
there is ALWAYS someone at the bottom and ALWAYS someone at the top.

Where in my post did I say there was?

didnt say you did.

was merely venting that people feel the need to "level the playing field" usually by lowest common denominator(sp).

[prand]

Willie Dee said:

prand said:

Yes I see that - but i'm not clear how this applies to schools and doing exams? How does a dad, apart from providing drive to the supposedly talentles kid at home, and influence over the teachers to make sure they give them the right attention (which any parent can do), actually influence exam results? You all do the same exams, or do you?

Willie - you're confusing me here. Is this your answer to my question, an illustration to your original point, or an explanation to why you have this chip on your shoulder!

[Willie Dee]

prand said:

Willie - you're confusing me here. Is this your answer to my question, an illustration to your original point, or an explanation to why you have this chip on your shoulder!

Rather than point out the fact you were picking holes in an absurd analogy that was in itself a response to an absurd analogy, I thought the picture said more than that which I could summon the effort of typing.

Edited by Willie Dee on Wednesday 4th August 15:06

Edited by Willie Dee on Wednesday 4th August 15:06

[Willie Dee]

rich1231 said:

Willie Dee said:

rich1231 said:

Will you stop bleating please. Life is unfair, get over it.

Life is indeed unfair, and its nice we have progressed over the years as a society to recognise that fact and tax people accordingly. A small token to attempt to even the odds just a little bit to make life worth living to those not born into wealth.

Is live worth living for you?

Really is it not?

How many millions of suicides do we have each year in the UK with life not worth living as the excuse?

I too do not understand hyperbole on an internet forum, especially one which is as renowned as the Piston Heads News, Politics & Economics sub section.

I too also ask a question based on said hyperbole while making vast assumptions.

[Willie Dee]

JB! said:

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS SOCIAL EQUALITY.

the sooner perople realise this, the better.
there is ALWAYS someone at the bottom and ALWAYS someone at the top.

I completely agree, and am glad we live in a society that attempts to make being at the bottom easier than it could be.

[prand]

Willie Dee said:

prand said:

Willie - you're confusing me here. Is this your answer to my question, an illustration to your original point, or an explanation to why you have this chip on your shoulder!

Rather than point out the fact you were picking holes in an absurd analogy that was in itself a response to an absurd analogy, I thought the picture said more than that which I could summon the effort of typing.

Edited by Willie Dee on Wednesday 4th August 15:06

Edited by Willie Dee on Wednesday 4th August 15:06

Ok cheers - get it now.

[anonymous-user]

heebeegeetee said:

the tories started closing all the factories and mines down, and moved the nations wealth earning capacity to the square mile

close down the city, reopen the mines and bring back british leyland. that'll fix it.

[heebeegeetee]

fbrs said:

heebeegeetee said:

the tories started closing all the factories and mines down, and moved the nations wealth earning capacity to the square mile

close down the city, reopen the mines and bring back british leyland. that'll fix it.

No, we just needed good management, but tbh i don't think it exists here. We can do alright under foreign management though, luckily.