President Trump

Sometimes it seems that's a much bigger priority for Ttump supporters than right or wrong, good or bad, acceptable actions and unacceptable actions.

So long as you get a rise ...

Obviously I can't speak to the OPs situation and motivations but what you mention was something I could never quite get my head round; but a while back I read about the influence of a scientific paper from the 70s called The Structure of Coping. Long story short it spawned all sorts of research on how people do or don't cope when put under stresses like financial duress. Some of this research illustrates how prolonged exposure to stressors can lead to a reduced level of emotional maturity and regulation. Which feels like something populists and would be dictators have intuitively understood all along.

One of the primary reasons people turn to populists is they've been under prolonged socioeconomic stress. If this stress has in turn led to maladaption of their emotional regulation systems and maturity, it makes sense that a populist can exploit this vulnerability to manipulate them into being more callous, more reckless and more childish than they might be in other less stressed circumstances.
 
has led to a significant increase in the percentage of kids being educated privately in the last half century.

I don't think this is the case

1759996752861.png
www.llakes.ac.uk%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2021%2F03%2FRP-62.-Green-Anders-Henderson-Henseke.pdf

1759996802859.png

 
Obviously I can't speak to the OPs situation and motivations but what you mention was something I could never quite get my head round; but a while back I read about the influence of a scientific paper from the 70s called The Structure of Coping. Long story short it spawned all sorts of research on how people do or don't cope when put under stresses like financial duress. Some of this research illustrates how prolonged exposure to stressors can lead to a reduced level of emotional maturity and regulation. Which feels like something populists and would be dictators have intuitively understood all along.

One of the primary reasons people turn to populists is they've been under prolonged socioeconomic stress. If this stress has in turn led to maladaption of their emotional regulation systems and maturity, it makes sense that a populist can exploit this vulnerability to manipulate them into being more callous, more reckless and more childish than they might be in other less stressed circumstances.
I like this post, something Elon Musk has touched on recently.
 
I don't think this is the case

View attachment 171800
www.llakes.ac.uk%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2021%2F03%2FRP-62.-Green-Anders-Henderson-Henseke.pdf

View attachment 171801

Thanks for that mate. Interesting. Also noteworthy it peaked around the time of the credit crunch in the second graph, which we’ve never really recovered from.

The percentage of teachers in the first graph is quite telling too and the only logical conclusion to draw from that is that there have been huge reductions in the number of state teachers in that time.

I am assuming that grammar schools formed under the Education Act 1944 weren’t deemed as private. The only reason I raise that is there was a sharp decline from 1964 to 1978 which (iirc) coincides with when those schools were winding down.
 
Thanks for that mate. Interesting. Also noteworthy it peaked around the time of the credit crunch in the second graph, which we’ve never really recovered from.

The percentage of teachers in the first graph is quite telling too and the only logical conclusion to draw from that is that there have been huge reductions in the number of state teachers in that time.

I am assuming that grammar schools formed under the Education Act 1944 weren’t deemed as private. The only reason I raise that is there was a sharp decline from 1964 to 1978 which (iirc) coincides with when those schools were winding down.
Or the pupil-teacher ratio in private schools has got significantly "better" (or more private tutors). Average school fees in real terms would be another interesting stat.
 
Trump now as short as 6/4. As much as I despise him, I'd hand him the friggin' prize myself if he can get this peace deal over the line. It would be the one decent thing he's done in his life, even if he is only doing it for his own ego.

Some mental names further down the betting. IDF at 66/1 FFS!
 
Trump now as short as 6/4. As much as I despise him, I'd hand him the friggin' prize myself if he can get this peace deal over the line. It would be the one decent thing he's done in his life, even if he is only doing it for his own ego.

Some mental names further down the betting. IDF at 66/1 FFS!

Peace deal for how long ? I don’t feel any optimism about all this.
 
Trump now as short as 6/4. As much as I despise him, I'd hand him the friggin' prize myself if he can get this peace deal over the line. It would be the one decent thing he's done in his life, even if he is only doing it for his own ego.

Some mental names further down the betting. IDF at 66/1 FFS!

I assume the betting market is just a thing of it's own? Technically no one other than the committee itself knows the list of nominees do they? Think they release the list 50 years after or something like that. Presumably some people are quite open about who they've nominated.
 
Thanks for that mate. Interesting. Also noteworthy it peaked around the time of the credit crunch in the second graph, which we’ve never really recovered from.

The percentage of teachers in the first graph is quite telling too and the only logical conclusion to draw from that is that there have been huge reductions in the number of state teachers in that time.

I am assuming that grammar schools formed under the Education Act 1944 weren’t deemed as private. The only reason I raise that is there was a sharp decline from 1964 to 1978 which (iirc) coincides with when those schools were winding down.
Those grammar schools eventually had to choose to go private or comprehensive in most LA areas. Thus Manchester grammar went private and William Hulmes went comprehensive.
 
Up to then, the 11+ was the route in. The schools were free, but selective.
No, I understand what the 11+ was. Your post said MGS went private and WH went comprehensive (state). The question is, what were they classified as (as grammar schools) previously? The word went suggests they came from somewhere else, but where?

As the stats in that graph suggest private.
 
No, I understand what the 11+ was. Your post said MGS went private and WH went comprehensive (state). The question is, what were they classified as (as grammar schools) previously? The word went suggests they came from somewhere else, but where?

As the stats in that graph suggest private.
I think the difference is when state assisted places ended. MGS raised money to extend their bursary scheme, whereas William Hulme went fully comprehensive instead.
 
No, I understand what the 11+ was. Your post said MGS went private and WH went comprehensive (state). The question is, what were they classified as (as grammar schools) previously? The word went suggests they came from somewhere else, but where?

As the stats in that graph suggest private.
Ah, they were grammars paid for by the state, the local authority, and endowments.
Both MGS and WH were Direct Grant schools, ie they joined a central gov scheme of finance in 1945.
 
Last edited:

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top