The reason universities take in so many international students is because that get in more money. example: UK student may pay £3000 a year for a course while international students may pay £10,000 for the same course. That's how they balance the books
I won't open the can of worms the statement 'accident of birth' suggests - suffice to say it's not a statement I feel ought to be used when describing someone's colour. My job deals with this kind of thing all the time. I work as a Lead Business Analyst, and am forever needing to challenge people's assumptions on what makes valid business sense because they highlight one or two bits of data and build a case around it. When we look at ALL the data, their assumptions do not always stand up. That's the problem with statistics, you can make an argument for anything (even leaving the EU ) but unless you get the full picture, you could be - at best - solving a problem that may well not exist, or worse, creating a problem that need not have been made. The article does address some of that, but there are still gaps. Unless we get a really good picture as to why there are less applicants, and why the applicant's colour or finances do (or do not) have bearing, then it's going to be difficult to resolve unless you set universities targets and quotas - both of which being in a problem that's arguably worse than the one we may be looking at today. There'd also need to be an adjustment for geographical bias. I'm not by any means saying that there isn't a problem, just that we'd need to understand a lot more than we do now about why it may exist and what the aggregated causes are.
Yep, I can't really blame them, the whole system is set up to maximise income rather than deliver taxpayers a good education for their kids. its an accident of birth that I'm a white, British person, I don't feel it's a loaded statement, but if it is interpreted as such, I'm sorry. This one has been analysed to death Chaz. Certain groups underachieve in our educational system and are underepresented in positions of influence. Quotas etc certainly won't address the factors which lead to this, but I agree I think this particular topic won't be an easy one for here. It caught my eye because I actually studied at Durham University (well, I say studied....) and that number really made me jump. Though I can't remember any black contemporaries from 35 years ago, so I suppose they could argue that there has been a massive improvement...... What industry do you analyse?
I've worked for a number of companies across Financial, Services, Logistics and Manufacturing. Most of the work involves IT systems (because I've never yet met a C-level exec who doesn't think that a problem can't be solved by a new bit of software) but increasingly I'm being drawn into business process change management and analysing new product plans to validate that they are going to make the money the business sponsors claim - answer tends to be pretty uniformly "no, not quite that much..." If my work background leads me to dive into detail and try to explain - or push people for reasons why they have stated something - that probably explains why I've chosen to opt out of the EU referendum thread. Too much like the day job....
Some similarities, though I don't do much analysis (others do that, exhaustively) rely on experience and instinct, one of the few benefits of age. Of course I am wrong most of the time, but they still pay me, out of pity I guess.
George Soros thinks we are staying in, and he has $24bn of wealth from betting (sorry investing) on stuff like this to back him up. He did us during the ERM crisis, bet against the US mortgage banks in 2007 and won $1bn, and has come out of retirement to make some small change (over $100m) this year having a flutter on gold, and gold and silver mining companies. Despite his trade I rather like George, he has always been upfront about what he is doing and lamented the circumstances that allow him to do it, is impeccably socially liberal and gives a fortune (literally) in charitable activities. The acceptable face of capitalism.
.....and, from my liberal elite perspective, their appallingly bad taste. Criminal in multiple senses.
Yes I don't think you have to be from the liberal elite to appreciate what crashingly bad taste it all is. I hope the Commons committee go after them both with an absolute will
Green looks like he gets all his clothes from TopMan (fine for skinny teenagers and twenty somethings) as well as owning it. But I bet they are incredibly expensive designer stuff, albeit dubious aesthetically, which just look like tat as soon as they are placed in his ample flesh.
In fairness to him, it must be hard to track down your favourite shirt when it could be on any of your three yachts
Anyone else noticed how, in all the TV and radio debates conducted in front live audiences, the Leave representatives seem to get much more support from the audience? I'm pretty sure this isn't down to unfairly weighted audience selection, but more a reflection of how much more passionate the Brexiters are about their cause. To assess the 'result' of these debates on audience reaction would be a mistake in my opinion - hard to believe that many people would have been convinced one way or another by the quality of the arguments put. Overall, it seems the surge towards Leave based on their focus on immigration seems to have stalled, with the BBC's poll of polls showing Remain on 43%, Leave on 42% and 15% undecided. The bookies' odds on Remain have shortened a little further to 2/7 and this is a better indicator, I would suggest.
The Beast of Bolsover has put his hat in the Leave camp. Mike Ashley's Sports Direct warehouse is in his constituency. The vast majority of his workforce are Eastern Europeans. The work conditions are Dickensian and probably why they are the preferred workforce. Sadly this practice goes on all over the country. How the Labour Party backs Remain is a mystery to me. Tony Benn and Michael Foot will be spinning in their graves
The Labour Party has not been the party of the British working man since Blair and the Islington set came in
From what I saw last evening in the debate I thought the remain side were poor in their performance, looking to score cheap points against Johnston, the quip about him only being interest in "No 10" from Amber whatever her name is was totally uncalled for in the context of the discussion, no matter how true it may be. The Shadow Business Secretary, can't remember her name, was just full of bluster and there's a certain irony in wheeling out Nicola Sturgeon as a representative of the remain camp when her sole purpose in politics is to leave the UK........ The one who did impress me was Grisal Stuart who spoke a lot of common sense and expressed her view that although she is German and you would expect her to be in favour of the EU, came across as making quiet an elegant case for leaving. In fact I thought the leavers made their case in a calm manner which if I were voting and undecided in how to vote could have helped make up my mind.......unlike the remain side who just wanted to shout the loudest..... Where's Jezzer and the rest of them?
someone on another forum suggesting Corbyn could switch sides, now that would cause shock waves. Some MP's up north are unhappy the Labour leadership are ignoring the genuine concerns of their voters on immigration.
...and Nigel Farage, on the basis of any port in a storm... Is it any wonder there's discontent in the air?
One day this 'them and us' approach to everything will be gone, but I don't think I'll see the day.....
