Should we abolish tenure?

  1. Replace with robots.
  2. Bring back moral standards.
  3. Snatch their pensions (must anyway, for national debt). Commies hate saving.
  4. Easier firing.
  5. Student feedback system.
  6. Any sexual misconduct and you’re gone.
  7. Single-sex schools, mostly solves 6.
  8. Tenure has age requirement and it’s high.
  9. Out of office signalling is to be discouraged.
  10. MOOCs for the basic shit.
  11. Make singletons exempt from paying for public schools (singlism already could do this), unless they want to.
  12. No summers off. None of you work a farm, you don’t need summers off.
  13. Atheists must work over the holidays. Hoist by their own petard.
  14. Most of their concepts have failed, let the students disagree without getting marked down.
  15. No grading on a curve, this doesn’t treat the students as individuals (snowflakes) and is sexist/racist/whatever.

 

The myth of austerity (UK)

https://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_national_spending_analysis

The raw, REAL* amount of what we literally spend in GBP (£).

You see that red bar? That means it’s going UP.

Real is the technical term for that chart.

As a % of GDP, we’re spending as much as the last Labour government.

2010 is when the Tories got in. Note that spending went up.

If you want to know why it’s been forced to stabilize, the notion of slagflation might come in handy.
GDP has sucked.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/timeseries/ihyq/pgdp

This is why the Tories got in. This is not temporary.

https://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/past_spending

I think this chart’s my favourite. Longitudinal data of economic parasitism.

Guardian readers citing stats out of historical context to make history-based arguments are hilarious.
Austerity spending is a contradiction in terms. Balanced budgeting is no more a bad thing than an addict complaining you’ve stopped enabling him. The inflation is caused by extant liabilities we must continue to pay out for; we can scarcely afford current welfare etc. (not including pensions, which we can never afford as unfunded). Let alone to add new ones in like a student with Daddy’s credit card during Fresher’s Week. The money simply isn’t there and it never will be. Pensions must be funded first. The economy is stagnant as you saw by GDP, we’re barely breaking even and this was a long-term plateau long before Brexit. Compared to other countries, like the US I was duffing up yesterday, we’re actually doing okay.

Public spending for “Social Protection” started at 0.7 percent of GDP in 1900 and has now reached over 15 percent of GDP.

But it’s the military dragging us down, right?
We must stop funding attack helicopters, shouldn’t we, Sue, 57, from Brighton?

https://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_defence_spending_30.html

In terms of Gross Domestic Product UK defence spending was 2.85 percent of GDP in 2000. But from 2002 to 2009 defence spending was constant at about 2.65-2.70 percent GDP. Since the Great Recession, defence spending been in steady decline, breaking below 2.4 percent GDP in 2016.

Read it and weep you intellectually dishonest douches.

https://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_total_spending_pie_chart

Welfare (NOT including pensions) is more than DOUBLE military expenses.

General 2%
Transport 4%
Protection 4%
Welfare 14%
Defence 6%
Education 11%
Health Care 18%
Pensions 20%
Interest 7%
Other 15%.

I know you’re allergic to maths but bar charts and pie charts are kiddie tier.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/dec/06/english-schools-core-subject-test-results-international-oecd-pisa

Education, for example, we suck at harder than ever.
The schools that still teach (by rote) are killing us.

Here to agree with me is famed conservative Paul Krugman.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/ng-interactive/2015/apr/29/the-austerity-delusion

He supposedly thinks austerity is BS and it shouldn’t even be tried because it won’t work. He thinks it’s a myth too.

“But won’t this lead to budget deficits? Yes, and that’s actually a good thing.”

This is how you can tell Krugman isn’t actually an economist or economist isn’t actually a job. Numerical psychic is not a job.

” in effect, an economy in which the public is trying to save more than businesses are willing to invest. In such an economy the government does everyone a service by running deficits and giving frustrated savers a chance to put their money to work. “

You can’t put money to work when nobody wants to work with it.
That is what investment literally is. Random spending isn’t investment.
I don’t invest in half a dozen shots, I blow it. Investments are carefully calculated for perceptible gains. Not moral gains, actual fiscal cash in the bank gains.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4634536/PETER-OBORNE-myth-austerity.html

“However, I accept that this week’s Queen’s Speech does contain one very serious flaw: it marks the moment when the British Government abandoned any serious attempt to control spending.”

“There is, in fact, no limit to the proposals for public spending put forward by Jeremy Corbyn and his front bench, who are clearly basing their economics on the existence of ‘magic money trees’.

Suddenly, the dominating narrative in public life is that, instead of trying to live within our means as a nation, we should cast off ‘austerity’.”

The Guardian’s battle screech.

That aside, now that Britain’s so-called austerity has become the focus of intense debate, it is important to expose the myth that the nation’s finances have been cut to the bone under the Tories. That suggestion is nonsense — for the simple reason that there has been very little austerity at all.

Last week, Sir Nicholas Macpherson, Permanent Secretary at the Treasury from 2005-2016, wrote an exceptionally important article for the Financial Times. He noted that gross public debt actually rose as a proportion of national income between 2010 and 2016, from 76 per cent to 89 per cent.

As Sir Nicholas wrote: ‘Britain never experienced austerity.’ As someone who ran Britain’s most important financial institution for 11 years, he is in a position to know.

It’s fake news.

between 2010 and 2016, from 76 per cent to 89 per cent.”

Again, 2010 – the year the Tories got in. Since the Tory Party got in, +13% has already been spent. That is a 100% true statement.

I love it when new guys assume I can’t math.

Why do you think my predictions work out? They’re not opinions.

You know what has been good for the economy?

Brexit!

https://www.ft.com/content/cf51e840-7147-11e7-93ff-99f383b09ff9

It is still too early to to say that Brexit has damaged the performance of the economy because the slowdown might reverse once the squeeze on incomes passes.

What would the FT know?
We haven’t actually left yet. The Left predicted we’d all be eating our pets like Venezuela by now. Marginal growth is still going up!

The EU waits to see our terms of disengagement. Then the investments will flow.

Savings?

The decline also reflects an error that the Office for National Statistics has identified that understated incomes in its data, which is due to be rectified soon.

Since when did Communists care about savings they can’t steal?

The cause of the decline in living standards is more closely linked to a rise in inflation rather than a fall in average wage growth, but both have played a part. And with social security benefits for non-pensioners frozen, real income growth is also likely to have fallen.

Labour market is still saturated with EU workers’ competition. Cannot be called yet.

Every indicator of the number of people in the labour market has been positive since the EU referendum. The unemployment and underemployment rates are down, while participation in the labour market, the employment rate and vacancies are all up.

See?

With such a clear and positive picture, the best data are simply the headline unemployment rate, which has fallen from 4.9 per cent to 4.5 per cent in the past year, to reach its lowest level since 1975.

Maths is hard for Commies, especially when it doesn’t go the way they hoped (which it always does).

In recent months the gap between the world’s two most important currencies diverged as the euro gained against a weakening dollar. Sterling has also gained, but not as much. 

Which economy isn’t totally fucking itself over with immigrated dead weight?
It’s a long game, padre.

Recently

https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2017/nov/08/chinese-exports-trade-trump-us-banks-brexit-uk-economy-business-live

UK firms expect higher pay rises, as Brexit hits investment plans – as it happened

Exactly as I predicted. More workers making money, oh no!

Why? Stable currency. Exactly as I predicted. The EU is doomed largely from the Eurozone.

Don’t believe me? Despite ever-expanding debt, they’re predicting growth.
Magical pixie growth.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2017/nov/09/german-trade-surplus-uk-housing-market-cools-vauxhall-jobs-business-live

EC slashes UK growth forecasts but sees best eurozone growth in a decade – business live

European Commission says Brexit uncertainty will hurt UK investment, but the rest of Europe is doing ‘significantly better than expected’”

Well I see no reason for bias in that sentence!
Meanwhile, someone a little more objective.

https://www.ft.com/content/cb8bc258-4510-11e6-9b66-0712b3873ae1

IMF downgrades eurozone growth post-Brexit

http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=EUR&to=GBP&view=10Y

This is what you’re celebrating?eurgdp10y.png

Let’s compare to the reserve currency so you can really see what I mean.

eurusd10y

Yes, so strong… such growth, much potential…

giggle-lol-haha

While America is screwed, nobody is as screwed as the EU/Eurozone.

titanic EU lightsout#2big2fail

A little known and very recent piece of news, which should be making headlines but isn’t, while negotiations are ongoing.

https://fp.brecorder.com/2017/11/20171109233563/

The eurozone’s top bank supervisor, Daniele Nouy, on Tuesday urged the sector to press ahead with cross-border mergers, arguing tie-ups would help forge a stronger European finance industry.

If it’s already strong….
Don’t bother with logic.

Have you ever run in a three-legged race? They’re essentially arguing that if you yoke a lame man to a fit one, the lame one will be fit. This is formally known as magical thinking and colloquially known as “batshit insane”.

The theoretical term is Communism.
No, really. This principle is international collectivism. Marx never said that was possible but whatever, why let that stop them, surely they know Marxism better than Marx.
https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/collectivism
It is.
The cognitive dissonance of objecting to national state power because it’s too big and corrupt while advocating for supranational state infrastructure.
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism
“This society would be based on the common ownership”
This requires dissolving national borders and class boundaries. The former is easier than the latter, because, as we know from HBD, class is largely genetic (see intergenerational studies). Maybe that’s why they always shoot people, because the productive won’t just get down and act quietly parasitic like their fellow countrymen. What treason. It isn’t as if humans evolve and continue to mutate and diversify at different rates in myriad ways, is it? Don’t be absurd, we’re interchangeable cogs, that is totally respectful of our human rights and special snowflakeness (the sudden explosion of the latter in the young is culturally related to the popularity of the former position) i.e. no cogs are allowed to be sparkly.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collectivism

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/iain-duncan-smith-eu-communist-a6901211.html

“The EU was set up by the founding fathers, an important man called [Altiero] Spinelli, an Italian, who was an ex-communist, he designed the Maastricht Treaty and the Single European Act, why?

Is there any such thing as an ex-Communist?
[No.]

“He said because this is a political project, bringing the nations of Europe closer and closer together to create a place called Europe and the design of this was such that politicians who come and go could not actually override this decisions of the bureaucracy because otherwise we would never get there.”

Opposing democracy? Lovely.

https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/dictatorship
Dictatorship implies absolute power — one person who takes control — of a political situation”

Despots order things. The EU has done this.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/3707704/Undemocratic-EU-bullies-Ireland-into-another-vote.html

https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/Caesarism
https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/totalitarianism
“If the government has complete and absolute power over the people, that’s totalitarianism. This is a repressive, unfree type of society.”

That can’t be legal? Already is, babycakes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereignty
https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/sovereignty

Over democracy, what does the EU have?

The doctrine of supremacy. It isn’t even hiding the Orwell there.

https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/administrative-law/doctrine-of-supremacy-of-european-union-administrative-law-essay.php

In a series of important rulings the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has developed the doctrine of supremacy of European Union (EU) over national law.

trans. Over national populations.

EU law is absolutely supreme even over provisions of national constitutions.

No voting out of this one.

They changed the wikipedia page when the Brexit referendum was announced.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primacy_of_European_Union_law

It used to be Supremacy. You can still find it via search.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supremacy

Click through to see…

But I’m totally imagining things, right?

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/841539/EU-news-European-Union-fourth-reich-Germany-communism-Poland

Krzysztof Karoń, Polish publicist, spoke on Telewizja Republika where he accused the European Union of writing its “communist agenda” into its own laws.

He said: “In March this year the European Commission signed its white paper, which was dubbed the Rome Declaration.

“The only binding manifesto of the EU became the communist manifesto from 1941.”

“It is written in the programme that ‘the first goal is to erase borders dividing Europe into sovereign states’ and that ‘every single undertaking must be verified under this first point’.”

He underlined that in his view this is the root of all political problems sweeping through the continent.

Ridiculous?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurocommunism

I wrote this today because a lot of this is new today.

GUARDIANISTA, GREAT NEWS!

Don’t worry about austerity, we never had it.

“You can do anything” parenting and teaching is actively harmful

http://aeon.co/magazine/psychology/why-telling-kids-to-dream-big-is-a-big-con/

It comes down to IQ grade. IQ denialism, as it was suggested by Haidt, makes about as much sense now as New Earth Creationism in biology, there is simply so much evidence.

Grades are just proxies for IQ — which most parents are too dumb to conceive of.

IQ isn’t strictly a number, it’s a grouping with an error variance. The Binet IQ was intended for school application ONLY – to ascertain how the child’s learning process could be assisted by teachers at each stage (level of work compared to their chronological age), look at modern Sets for the truest application.

If you’re at the top grouping possible for a human, as an adult, A+/200+ High Genius or basic polymath, you have all the choices. And who doesn’t want options for their child (and by ego extension, a compliment to their own genetic material) but the further down the pyramid you go, the more restricted your future prospects. These are facts.

If you wanna be an astronaut, you’d better be making As and Bs. Just because you sat in the same classroom for decades doesn’t mean you’re equal in life quality potential or entitled to the same things as adults (public school kids and pronounced failures regardless of family fortune are the amusing example).

Telling children they all have equal potential may seem nice, and the Nurture Brigade of modern teaching insist it’s fair (if you are ignorant of their status yes, in case) and necessary (see former) – but it traumatizes the average and below-average children and sets them up for a lifetime of suffering, and probable mental illness (hark! Freud’s ghost laughing in the distance). Children blame themselves when they fail or something goes wrong. Fine if the changes needed are within their control… this is rarely the case here.  The self-esteem movement formed to prevent mental illness, theoretically as a shield against it, and now… many young people are popping pills.

This lie about potential doesn’t even sink in (because for this to apply, they are dumb) when they’re adults. Millennials are miserable. They see their age-peers succeed and assume (all else being equal) there is something they can do about it, and feel entitled (+) or wronged (-), that their own course isn’t going the same way (a few come up with lies i.e. their competition is cheating, or secretly evil).

n.b. IQ is computed by age, so child ones are unreliable although age 11/12 is highly correlated, it’s best to get retested as an adult and expect a small dive. Many supposed prodigies fail on this count because they were merely ahead of the curve at school (by external factors of socialisation, see Gladwell’s Outliers), and not genetically ahead (permanently ahead). Hence, prodigies seem to burn out, when in fact the fakes (harsh but true) merely crash into the wall of their genetic potential. Elements of the modern school system e.g. obedience to popular belief, lack of imagination and rote memory dependence also contribute to this false-flagging of intelligence, as it were, rewarding traits which are, in effect, the anti-genius. Lies on the other side of the IQ fence.

PC teaching method is inferior to traditional, study finds

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/10/31/Teaching-Report-Tradition-Best-in-Classroom

The report, What Makes Great Teaching, commissioned by the Sutton Trust and Durham University takes aim at “inefficient” and “ineffective” fashionable teaching methods such as “child centred learning” and “discovery learning”, which it claims is retarding the progress of young people in schools. It praises traditional, efficient methods and the establishment of clear rules for classroom behaviour, and anticipates the potential anger among the teaching community the report could generate.

…The report also rejected the modern notion that students needed regular praise and boosts to their self-worth to succeed. In reality, it is claimed, constant praise encourages complacency among learners. Indicating to a student that more is expected of them through disapproval of performance instead produces the desired effect: “For low-attaining pupils, praise… meant to be encouraging and protective can actually convey a message of low expectations.

…Ultimately, the report concludes that the most important element that makes a good teacher is not their use of fashionable teaching methods, but “strong knowledge and understanding of their subject” which shows “strong evidence of impact on student outcomes”.

The least important aspects that contribute to good teaching are “teacher beliefs”, which includes their knowledge of teaching theory and “conceptual models”, and “professional beliefs” which includes “reflecting on and developing professional practice”. In comparison to teacher knowledge, these practices only show “some evidence” of improving students.

The findings appear to vindicate the efforts of former Education Secretary Michael Gove to reform the UK’s schools system. In September 2013, he said modern methods of teaching were contributing to the “sidelining of the teacher from the activity of learning” and that “theorists have consistently argued for ways of organising classrooms and classroom activity which reduce the teacher’s central role in education”.

Mr. Gove said: “Allied to these teaching methods which have nothing to do with passing on knowledge, there has also been an emphasis on teachers having to put their own learning aside so that work is ‘relevant’ to the students. This has resulted in the dumbing of educational material down to the level of the child – with GCSE English papers that ask students about Tinie Tempah, or Simon Cowell – rather than encouraging the child to thirst after the knowledge of the teacher”.

The Guardian reports the comments of one deputy headmaster who expressed concerns that the valuable conclusions of the report would be lost unless teachers took heed. He said: “Until teachers, school leaders – and perhaps vitally, Ofsted inspectors – are brought up to speed with the latest developments, the impact will be limited”.