orchard
Player Valuation: £60m
So you're saying London's well brain-washed?
Current Affairs EU In or Out
- Thread starter micknick
- Start date
- Status
magicjuan
Player Valuation: £60m
More compliant in the areas of control.. As the epicentre it has to be. A generalisation in fairness borne from experience.
orchard
Player Valuation: £60m
I suppose that because most move to the smoke looking for a pot of gold is an important predisposition.
magicjuan
Player Valuation: £60m
That can be put down to survival, necessity or ambition. It could also be considered as avarice in certain cases.
That may be, but equally, you're much more likely to have a decent job with a decent education. That's hard to dispute and is perhaps the point here.
orchard
Player Valuation: £60m
So, are you saying that 'if 'decent' jobs were more available elsewhere in the uk, outside of London, then more would have voted remain'?
I think that one thing that many leave voters had in common was that they had lost out to globalisation in some form or other. Being better able to compete in the labour market is therefore a good indication of how one might have voted in the referendum. That's reflected in university towns such as Bristol voting strongly to remain, whereas post-industrial towns voted strongly to leave.
magicjuan
Player Valuation: £60m
That's a matter of interpretation. What defines decent? Salary? Satisfaction? Work life balance?
Different to all. The fact there is a weighting allowance for London suggests the interpretation is skewed somewhat.
In the eye of the beholder isn't it? It is beyond dispute however that those with a degree voted very differently to those without a degree.
Whistlin' Dixie
Player Valuation: £50m
This thread still goin'?
*Tuts & rolls eyes*
*Tuts & rolls eyes*
magicjuan
Player Valuation: £60m
But that doesn't define intelligence does it. I would suggest the people I have found to be more politically savvy have had no university education but are practised and savvy in the realities of living.
It seems patronising to participatory democracy to suggest one particular viewpoint is highr educated=intelligent=right.
It is the beholder, which is where the interpretation fits in.
We could end up in the exclusion/ entrapment of fees being something that puts sections of society off from university which recent research has shown, in turn this makes your educated=intelligent=right argument into a social exclusive experiment designed to create opportunities to those with access to funds thereby keeping these opportunities from having the gene pool soiled by the oily prats from the less well off.
It used to be called social engineering and it was used to create an untermenschen.
Dangerous line of thinking.
I wasn't suggesting that those with a degree will vote the correct way and those without won't, merely that those with at least a degree are more able to survive globalisation than those without, and this influences how people voted. The data I linked t clearly showed that areas such as London, Bristol and Cambridge have very high proportions of degree holders amongst their collective workforce, and these places voted overwhelmingly remain. Places such as chunks of Kent, which the data revealed have very low numbers of degree owners, voted overwhelmingly leave.
That can't be a coincidence, can it?
magicjuan
Player Valuation: £60m
But again that indicates a general supposition promoted that degree holders are better educated and therefore more intelligent. That they voted remain is used as a proposition that was the right vote.
This idea that degrees mean greater adaptability to globalisation really just reinforces the argument of standardising education to suit systems adherence rather than learning, which suits the interdependence, fluidity and mobility necessary for globalisation to exist.
It also stifles creativity, spontaneous development, organic development and natural progression. It dehumanises learning. It serves profit only, that is the intent and purpose.
We are as usual poles apart but if we allow this systemic approach to continue apace there will be no retrieving the learning process back into creativity from robotic delivery.
That may be what you think, but not what I'm (trying to) say. I don't believe a degree represents knowledge or expertise any more than you do, but nonetheless it makes it easier in the job market than not having one. Therefore it's easier to adapt to shocks in the labour market, whether that's incoming migrants, automation or industries being outsourced.
In this and other posts, I've said numerous times that we're living in a golden age when it comes to access to opportunities to learn. It's literally never been better, yet it's still rare for someone to successfully go from one line of work to another, and that's certainly been the case in the various post-industrial towns of Britain that have suffered so as a result of one of the aforementioned shocks.
Personally I think the pace of change is only going to quicken, but there seems to be a sense that Brexit was a vote to try and slow that pace down. To reduce competition from migrants. To increase the ability, if not the willingness, to protect British companies. I don't think it was a vote that was saying change is inevitable, please lets us have more help adapting to it.
Yes with Brue googling away best trade figures in July while we are proceeding along with Brexit ?
My Davy and Gideon got it so wrong
- Status