The Politics Thread 4

Fed up talking videogames? Why?
User avatar
Return_of_the_STAR
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Politics Thread 4
by Return_of_the_STAR » Wed May 23, 2018 9:30 am

Frank wrote:Wonder how many of the closing M&S stores are Littlewoods shops they rebranded after the buyout. We've had two separate stores in our local shopping centre ever since, and the rent can't be cheap there (everything is closing down).


I’m not sure. But ours (Northampton) is listed for closure, a town of 230,000 can’t support an M&S store so it must be bad. They are also closing the one in Kettering. Leaving only one M&S (new rushden lakes development) for a whole county of over 700,000 people. This excludes the food only stores.

I feel bad for the old people. M&S in our town is clearly a weekly or twice weekly treat for some of them. The cafes also a meeting point for them and their friends.

Yid Army
User avatar
Lagamorph
Member ♥
Joined in 2010

PostRe: The Politics Thread 4
by Lagamorph » Wed May 23, 2018 9:32 am

The one in Darlington is closing and the one in Redcar closed down ages ago, but there are still 2 main M&S stores and 2 food halls within 15 miles of me, so I'm pretty sure at least one of those will end up closing.

Lagamorph's Underwater Photography Thread
Zellery wrote:Good post Lagamorph.
Turboman wrote:Lagomorph..... Is ..... Right
User avatar
KK
Moderator
Joined in 2008
Location: Botswana
Contact:

PostRe: The Politics Thread 4
by KK » Wed May 23, 2018 9:52 am

Vermilion wrote:
KK wrote:Belts were bloody terrible quality though so I use Savile Row for those.


Oooh, someone's posh.

Ha, the website isn't. I think they're basically trading off the name.

Image
User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Politics Thread 4
by Hexx » Wed May 23, 2018 12:41 pm

Grumpy David wrote:https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/22/labour-allows-male-activist-stand-womens-officer-identifies/

Labour allows male activist to stand as women's officer 'because he identifies as a woman on Wednesdays'

For those who aren't going to read the article: the guy is intentionally being ridiculous to show how easy it is to abuse Labour's "Self-ID" rules. He himself admits he's taking the piss, but points out that party rules stop anyone doing anything about it because he's said he's a woman (on Wednesdays) and, by their rules, his word cannot be challenged.


:slol:


What exactly was the problem he was highlighting?

He's been suspended now for being a pillock (or somesuch)

User avatar
Lotus
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Politics Thread 4
by Lotus » Wed May 23, 2018 1:05 pm

Can't say I agree with David Lammy's comments about Oxford University, but then I don't really buy into this obsession with diversity and identity politics, so that's no great surprise. I think he'd be a decent shout for a future Labour leader though - seems to have his head screwed on and talks a lot of sense. Him or Chuka, but I'm assuming the latter's position hasn't changed on the leadsership side of things (which is a shame).

User avatar
That
Dr. Nyaaa~!
Dr. Nyaaa~!
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Politics Thread 4
by That » Wed May 23, 2018 1:08 pm

Hexx wrote:
Grumpy David wrote:...For those who aren't going to read the article: the guy is intentionally being ridiculous to show how easy it is to abuse Labour's "Self-ID" rules. He himself admits he's taking the piss, but points out that party rules stop anyone doing anything about it because he's said he's a woman (on Wednesdays) and, by their rules, his word cannot be challenged...

What exactly was the problem he was highlighting?

He's been suspended now for being a pillock (or somesuch)

"We will accept you are a woman if you say you are"
Truly a horrible policy. I'm outraged. Thank goodness the vast satirical wit of Labour Activist David Lewis has been applied to this gross misjustice. Now that some sad bald dude has (snigger) "IDENTIFIED" (got 'em, snowflakes) as a woman, clearly the policy has been shown to be ridiculous. It's obvious that anyone saying they are a woman should just have a notarised doctor's letter handy to confirm that. Otherwise you could be A MAN IN DEEP COVER

What a complete prick.

Image
User avatar
Jenuall
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Jenuall
Location: 40 light-years outside of the Exeter nebula
Contact:

PostRe: The Politics Thread 4
by Jenuall » Wed May 23, 2018 1:20 pm

Lotus wrote:Can't say I agree with David Lammy's comments about Oxford University, but then I don't really buy into this obsession with diversity and identity politics, so that's no great surprise. I think he'd be a decent shout for a future Labour leader though - seems to have his head screwed on and talks a lot of sense. Him or Chuka, but I'm assuming the latter's position hasn't changed on the leadsership side of things (which is a shame).


I heard him on the radio this morning about the Oxford Uni diversity question. I've not looked at the stats regarding it directly but it feels like another similar situation to the recent "gender pay gap" disclosures - i.e. the data being published does not give enough information to make any really useful deduction about the true nature of the problem.

I gather that very few black students are getting places at Oxford - but I don't know if what has been published tells us anything about why that is the case. Is it because the applications process is racist? Are those managing interviews and shortlisting actively discriminating? Or is the number being accepted in line with the number applying - in which case do we need to look at why more black students are not applying or why the wider education system may be failing to support them in getting themselves into a position in which they can apply? Real detail is required in order to make useful judgements on what is wrong and more importantly what we can do to fix problems where they might exist.

User avatar
That
Dr. Nyaaa~!
Dr. Nyaaa~!
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Politics Thread 4
by That » Wed May 23, 2018 1:32 pm

When I was there, from chats with other students who were very interested in this kind of thing: Oxford's primary problem is that not enough black students apply. This has two components: black students underperforming in secondary school (so they can't apply), and those black students who do well at secondary school still not applying (because they are intimidated or whatever). The former isn't Oxford's problem - it speaks to institutionalised racism in schools and in wider society - but the latter very much is, and I guess that's what they're saying they'll try to address.

Image
User avatar
Cheeky Devlin
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Politics Thread 4
by Cheeky Devlin » Wed May 23, 2018 1:42 pm

Return_of_the_STAR wrote:
Frank wrote:Wonder how many of the closing M&S stores are Littlewoods shops they rebranded after the buyout. We've had two separate stores in our local shopping centre ever since, and the rent can't be cheap there (everything is closing down).


I’m not sure. But ours (Northampton) is listed for closure, a town of 230,000 can’t support an M&S store so it must be bad. They are also closing the one in Kettering. Leaving only one M&S (new rushden lakes development) for a whole county of over 700,000 people. This excludes the food only stores.

I feel bad for the old people. M&S in our town is clearly a weekly or twice weekly treat for some of them. The cafes also a meeting point for them and their friends.

The M&S in my town has been there my entire life, but the town centre has been effectively been on life-support for the past decade. There's naff all there and what is there is run-down and miserable. All the bigger shops that were there have slowly disappeared, replaced by pound-shops, charity shops, pawn shops and payday loan companies. We used to have four games shops alone within the centre (Game, Gamestation and 2 indies) and now only one of the indies remains.

But if that M&S closes then the town centre will die. There's nothing else worth the trip (And I'm a 10 minute walk from it). Perhaps it's for the best if it does. The whole thing needs to be torn down and a more modern centre built as all the local trade has gone to the small retail park at the bottom of the town.

User avatar
Jenuall
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Jenuall
Location: 40 light-years outside of the Exeter nebula
Contact:

PostRe: The Politics Thread 4
by Jenuall » Wed May 23, 2018 1:44 pm

Karl wrote:When I was there, from chats with other students who were very interested in this kind of thing: Oxford's primary problem is that not enough black students apply. This has two components: black students underperforming in secondary school (so they can't apply), and those black students who do well at secondary school still not applying (because they are intimidated or whatever). The former isn't Oxford's problem - it speaks to institutionalised racism in schools and in wider society - but the latter very much is, and I guess that's what they're saying they'll try to address.



True, although there is only so much that Oxford can do to solve the second problem as well. They can (and should) work to appear more approachable and inclusive and look at whether there is anything they can do in improving how they relate to and communicate with prospective students and so on - but ultimately they can't force people to apply!

Ultimately I guess it is about ensuring equality of opportunity - no mean feat when as you say there is still wide spread institutional racism. The barrier for entry should be "are you good enough?" and anyone regardless of race or background should be able to match up to that question.

User avatar
Vermilion
Gnome Thief
Joined in 2018
Location: Everywhere
Contact:

PostRe: The Politics Thread 4
by Vermilion » Wed May 23, 2018 2:25 pm

Cheeky Devlin wrote:But if that M&S closes then the town centre will die. There's nothing else worth the trip (And I'm a 10 minute walk from it). Perhaps it's for the best if it does. The whole thing needs to be torn down and a more modern centre built as all the local trade has gone to the small retail park at the bottom of the town.


My town never had an M&S to begin with, the centre here began to decline when Woolworths imploded.

User avatar
Winckle
Technician
Joined in 2008
Location: Liverpool

PostRe: The Politics Thread 4
by Winckle » Wed May 23, 2018 2:59 pm

Karl wrote:When I was there, from chats with other students who were very interested in this kind of thing: Oxford's primary problem is that not enough black students apply. This has two components: black students underperforming in secondary school (so they can't apply), and those black students who do well at secondary school still not applying (because they are intimidated or whatever). The former isn't Oxford's problem - it speaks to institutionalised racism in schools and in wider society - but the latter very much is, and I guess that's what they're saying they'll try to address.

I've heard that said before, but doesn't this kind of disprove that:

Image

I suppose it would depend on the ratios of other classes of students as well, but prima facie that looks really bad.

We should migrate GRcade to Flarum. :toot:
User avatar
Jenuall
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Jenuall
Location: 40 light-years outside of the Exeter nebula
Contact:

PostRe: The Politics Thread 4
by Jenuall » Wed May 23, 2018 3:09 pm

Winckle wrote:
Karl wrote:When I was there, from chats with other students who were very interested in this kind of thing: Oxford's primary problem is that not enough black students apply. This has two components: black students underperforming in secondary school (so they can't apply), and those black students who do well at secondary school still not applying (because they are intimidated or whatever). The former isn't Oxford's problem - it speaks to institutionalised racism in schools and in wider society - but the latter very much is, and I guess that's what they're saying they'll try to address.

I've heard that said before, but doesn't this kind of disprove that:

Image

I suppose it would depend on the ratios of other classes of students as well, but prima facie that looks really bad.


Interesting chart Winckle. I think this comes back to the point I made earlier about needing more complete data - as you say without knowing the ratios of other groups of students it is hard to draw firm conclusions.

At the "applications vs. offers" stage of the debate the only thing that should matter is that those who were given offers were demonstrably the best students - we can't see that from this information.

User avatar
That
Dr. Nyaaa~!
Dr. Nyaaa~!
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Politics Thread 4
by That » Wed May 23, 2018 3:11 pm

Winckle wrote:Image

I suppose it would depend on the ratios of other classes of students as well, but prima facie that looks really bad.

The standard admissions ratio is about 5 applicants to 1 acceptance. A lot of those ratios look more like 10:1, which does look really bad. Thanks for posting it.

It's interesting that the worst offender is Balliol, which I could easily believe is an institutionally racist College on some level. It's certainly one of the more Tory Colleges.

EDIT: For what it's worth, I went to St. Hugh's, which I think does bend the admissions rules a little to 'factor in' the effect of being a disadvantaged student -- as they should, and as they did for me. Accordingly, it has one of the best ratios on the graph (looks about 4:1 to my eye). It's positive that a handful of Colleges are progressive in this manner, but obviously very bad that the University isn't stepping in to correct Colleges that aren't.

Image
User avatar
That
Dr. Nyaaa~!
Dr. Nyaaa~!
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Politics Thread 4
by That » Wed May 23, 2018 3:25 pm

Jenuall wrote:At the "applications vs. offers" stage of the debate the only thing that should matter is that those who were given offers were demonstrably the best students - we can't see that from this information.

Do you agree that a poor black state school student that gets 95% across all her exams is way, way smarter than a rich white Etonian that gets 96% across all his exams? Because she is, and that should be recognised by the admissions office, and she should be chosen even if her numerical score is slightly lower.

Image
User avatar
Jenuall
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Jenuall
Location: 40 light-years outside of the Exeter nebula
Contact:

PostRe: The Politics Thread 4
by Jenuall » Wed May 23, 2018 3:38 pm

Karl wrote:
Jenuall wrote:At the "applications vs. offers" stage of the debate the only thing that should matter is that those who were given offers were demonstrably the best students - we can't see that from this information.

Do you agree that a poor black state school student that gets 95% across all her exams is way, way smarter than a rich white Etonian that gets 96% across all his exams? Because she is, and that should be recognised by the admissions office, and she should be chosen even if her numerical score is slightly lower.


Yes I would agree - I would suggest that they are demonstrably a better candidate through achieving 95% in a more challenging set of circumstances. There are always more factors to consider than just academic achievement - it obviously becomes harder to quantify those factors and therefore it may be a greater challenge to justify a decision based on them, but I'm 100% with you that the admissions process must take these things into account.

Like I say the more information there is to go on the better position we can be in to make these judgements. I'm not in any way trying to defend what does appear to be a failure on the part of these colleges - I just wanted to see more data to understand the reality and extent of the problem as that's going to be more useful in finding resolutions than just headlines of "Oxford is racist".

User avatar
That
Dr. Nyaaa~!
Dr. Nyaaa~!
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Politics Thread 4
by That » Wed May 23, 2018 3:51 pm

Cool! Agreed.

Image
User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Politics Thread 4
by Hexx » Wed May 23, 2018 4:03 pm

Karl wrote:
Jenuall wrote:At the "applications vs. offers" stage of the debate the only thing that should matter is that those who were given offers were demonstrably the best students - we can't see that from this information.

Do you agree that a poor school student that gets 95% across all their exams is way, way smarter than an Etonian that gets 96% across all their exams? Because they are, and that should be recognised by the admissions office, and she should be chosen even if their numerical score is slightly lower.


Why all the extra adjectives you didn't need?

User avatar
That
Dr. Nyaaa~!
Dr. Nyaaa~!
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Politics Thread 4
by That » Wed May 23, 2018 4:12 pm

Hexx wrote:Why all the extra adjectives you didn't need?

Because ethnicity and gender can be important indicators of "disadvantagedness" alongside family wealth? (For example in STEM I'd take a 95% girl over a 96% boy, all else being equal.) The point of including those adjectives was to hint at a fuller picture of my hypothetical two students, as it's exactly that holistic understanding of their circumstances that should be considered by admissions offices.

Image
User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Politics Thread 4
by Hexx » Wed May 23, 2018 4:30 pm

Karl wrote:
Hexx wrote:Why all the extra adjectives you didn't need?

Because ethnicity and gender can be important indicators of "disadvantagedness" alongside family wealth? (For example in STEM I'd take a 95% girl over a 96% boy, all else being equal.) The point of including those adjectives was to hint at a fuller picture of my hypothetical two students, as it's exactly that holistic understanding of their circumstances that should be considered by admissions offices.


Not sure I'd go with "we should make assumptions about people because of their race and/or sex" as a sound policy, but then...I kinda hate everyone :P

It's as much an "understanding" as it's "projecting your prejudices" on them.

Let's make it harder for you

95% Black Boy From a State School
95% Asian Girl From a State School
95% White Boy From a State School
96% White Girl From a top tier fee private School (but, they're there on Full Scholarship)

Who do you pick there?

(Don't read until you've thought about it a bit)

And who, if anyone, did you rule out of contention nearly automatically?


Return to “Stuff”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: addsy087, Cumberdanes, Garth, Google [Bot], Green Gecko, Grumpy David, Memento Mori, Met, more heat than light, Xeno and 375 guests