BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 09:41 AM

People don't drink alcohol in pubs as they once used to, so all soft drinks, including water, have rocketed in price.

False logic yet again. Soft drinks have ALWAYS been expensive in pubs. Well, around us anyway. In 1969 when I shouldn't have really been drinking anyway a pint of bitter was 1/10 - They charged more if you had a pint of shandy because the lemonade was dearer than the beer. Shortly after, when I started to take girls in pubs, I used to dislike buying a larger and lime - because they charged for a shot of lime! And once they introduced the draught soda machines (1980's?) they knew they could charge whatever they wanted - and did! Pubs and breweries have always known that soft drinks are, if you will excuse the pun, a soft touch.

One thing I will wholeheartedly agree with is the fact that clubs are an issue - Not even necessarily the tradition image of a club. A lot of city centre pubs have become the same. They should take some responsibility for assisting people into the states they get in. Extra legislation is not the answer though, There are already laws governing the situation that are not enforced. Did you know, by the way, that drunkenness is still an arrestable offence under the 1872 licensing act? When did you last hear of it being used? And the 1964 act establishes the responsibility and authority of your local pub landlord. By law, the licensee is not permitted to serve a drunken customer, or permit them on the premises.

How will extra legislation help? Once again, political smoke and mirrors. Scapegoats for bad management and media hype. Sorry, Lizzie - they have fooled you yet again.

DeG

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: theleveller
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 09:49 AM

Lizzie, much of what you write implies that the majority of people in this country are stupid, unthinking and incapable of making up their own minds. In fact, that anyone who disagrees with you must be an idiot or a dupe who is constantly and unthinkingly manipulated by politicians, teachers, the media or some other sinister force who is in control of our lives. This is not only obviously untrue, it is grossly insulting, demeaning and belittling to the vast majority of people in this country who are perfectly capable of ordering and controlling their lives and adapting to circumstances as they arise.

In your philosophy, the idea of personal freedom (except for you and those who agree with you) doesn't exist. This is the philosophy of totalitarianism.

Most people do not walk around in a state of despair and disillusionment – they get on with their lives and live them, as far as possible, how THEY WANT TO, usually within the law. The reality is that people get pissed because THEY WANT TO. Most parents support the education system because it's what THEY WANT. Children go to out-of-school clubs because THEY WANT TO. People vote into power the politicians THEY WANT TO. People read the newspapers THEY WANT TO. People accept the opinions THEY WANT TO and reject those they don't. Disagree, by all means, but don't imply that you are the only one who has made a conscious and informed decision about what is right and don't imply that your beliefs should be imposed on everyone 'for their own good'.

Many years ago, David Ogilvy, a very successful advertising man, told his staff, "The consumer is not an idiot – she's your wife." Give people some credit - we are not the mindless morons you portray us as and most of us simply don't want to live in Lizzieworld.

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Bryn Pugh
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 10:58 AM

Ah, yes - the 'Old Ways'. I can only conjecture why Lizzie Cornish 1 did not qualify 'Old Ways' with 'good'.

When I was at secondary school - 1956 - 1961 - there was no chance of being eddimacated. The "teachers" were too busy battering ten bells of shite out of us with cane, pressure tubing, size 14 gym slipper and the tawse.

I had my first dose of the tawse at six years old.

Is the foregoing one of the 'Old Ways' Lizzie would like to see the return of ?

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 11:13 AM

Something else just struck me when I saw the list of threads. The Watneys Party 7 was a product of our youth. It had one sole purpose as far as anyone who was 16 and going to a party in 1969 will tell you. To get you pissed without the hastle of having to open seven separate pint cans. I could never manage the full 7 but there were plenty who did. One of which could even drink. one handed, directly from said receptacle! They have no such equivalent today I am glad to say:-)

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Rasener
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 11:43 AM

Well I just drove past a pub in my own town at 3:30pm today and saw this bloke of at least 50+, stagger out of the pub and then have great difficulty keeping within the boundaries of the wall and the kerb. He was rat arsed. What an example to set young people.

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: GUEST,Jane Mellor
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 01:15 PM

I am 19 years of age. I think Lizzie watches too much television. A lot of people who get drunk in towns are over 30. It is really hard to get served in supermarkets and even with ID some pubs won't serve you.

She doesn't know what she is talking about.

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 01:43 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 09:49 AM
"For a woman to consider a job or career more important than having children is, quite literally, unnatural."
"Instead of complaining that nature prevents women from having successful careers women should embrace the career nature has ascribed to them - motherhood."
London BNP organiser Nick Eriksen
      -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
So far as I understand the point of above post, GUEST seems to think that, because something was said by someone with whose overall weltanschauung we nearly all disagree, it can't be right. This is a naive view. Even members of the BNP may occasionally be right about matters neutral to their main platforms. Or, in this instance, the fact that Lizzie might hold the same opinion on one particular issue as a BNP spokesperson doesn't, ipso facto, make her wrong about everything — nor even about that one particular view. — This is not one I happen to agree with, but it strikes me as perfectly tenable, and not to be dismissed out of hand just because someone in the BNP happens to agree with it. You will have to find a better argument than that if you intend to shoot it down, Guest.

(Slight drift - but perhaps valid as an example of what I mean — even Hitler once said something which I regard as the most perfect summation of a view with which I strongly concur, when he said that "Cigarettes are the red man's revenge on the white man for gin." The fact that I would probably not agree with a single other opinion he ever expressed doesn't invalidate my agreement with [& incidental admiration for the brilliant expression of] that particular one.)

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 04:00 PM

Thank you, M....

I despair of folks who now think that wanting Motherhood to be given back its significance, is akin to being in the BNP.

YEESH....

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: The Barden of England
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 05:23 PM

Lizzie - Fatherhood is just as important in a family scenario. My daughters of 31 and 30 and my wife of 32 years may agree or disagree of course, but I believe that fathers are just as important in their own way, and there are far too many fathers letting there children down. Far too many mothers too for that matter. Due to cheap booze - that's such an easy a target to blame. Poverty in our society is rife, and that is often the start of many a breakdown of family values.
John Barden

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 07:09 PM

M the GM - surely it was whisky.

John - compare my family.   Doing OK. I was at work so clearly I was not necessary (save biologically).

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Folkiedave
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 07:56 PM

Mike, there is a big difference between a basic philosophy of Kinder Kuche Kirche as it was once known and a simple aphorism (whether whisky or gin).

Here's Lizzie on women earlier this year:

Until the women of the Middle East, in general, rise as one to put an end to the male dominated society which prevails in so many countries over there, life will never improve for them...no matter how much people from the West try to help.

Women should be free to be who they want to be..

And note Lizzie - not a personal attack - simply noting what you wrote and how it contradicts what you currently write!

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 10:23 PM

Mike, there is a big difference between a basic philosophy of Kinder Kuche Kirche as it was once known and a simple aphorism (whether whisky or gin).===

I know, Dave. My point was that one can agree with the aphorism [whichever - 'To me way-hey-hey & we'll all all drink whisky AND gin'] without buying into the whole gestalt. All you are doing is repeating the point I make in simpler words for the thickos out there who couldn't geddit without having you interpret for them. Just a leetle patronising of you mebbe?

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 03:10 AM

>>>>>Here's Lizzie on women earlier this year:

Until the women of the Middle East, in general, rise as one to put an end to the male dominated society which prevails in so many countries over there, life will never improve for them...no matter how much people from the West try to help.

Women should be free to be who they want to be..

And note Lizzie - not a personal attack - simply noting what you wrote and how it contradicts what you currently write!<<<<<


Where have I stated in this thread that women do not have the right to be what they want to be????? I have stated that Motherhood should be regarded as far more important than it is these days, as once it used to be...And I have stated that if you choose to have children then you have a duty and responsibility to those children, and that they should come first.

If a woman chooses to be a mother, first and foremost, and wants to remain a stay at home Mum, then that is her freedom, Dave. She should be given absolute support and respect for that fact, not sniffed at for 'not having a job'...because she has one and it's the most important jobs in the world, because you are raising the next generation of humans.

On many forms you are either considered to be a Career Woman or nowt. It's crap. So many times I've heard "Oh, I'm sorry, I don't have a 'box' for 'Mother'. I need to know what job you do."

If the women of the Middle East want to be company executives, ice-cream sales folks or anything else, then good for them. If they want to be Mothers, then good for them also. It's their choice, or it SHOULD be.

But for most women to have a full time job and children, creates problems of time, love and tolerance...Many women now are saying they realise that the dream of 'You Can Have It All' is exactly that, a dream, because somewhere, something has to give under all that pressure and so often, it's the children.

Yes, there ARE Dad's who stay at home and raise their children whilst their partners work, and I'm sure many of them do a bloody wonderful job, but they are still in the minority, and like it or not, Mother Nature, for whatever reason, designed the female of the species to have the children, and in nearly all species that's so, along with the females raising the children...unless you're a Seahorse or a few others, before everyone points this out.

Children, imo, should come first, not 'Careers'...


I still remember a woman in the bed next to me, when my daughter was born...staring at her new baby, saying anxiously, that she was really worried that her social life was going to be comprimised by 'this'...and how she loved sports, going out, her career...etc..and I felt so bloody sorry for that child. Basically, it had just hit her...

John, I've very often stood up for men in here, and I feel that they've been pushed to the sidelines terribly by the feminists, as have women who want to be full time mothers.

My Dad gave me a very different kind of love to my mum....so I know only too well how important men are..but I'm merely saying that children are bloody important too and putting them into the care of the State, as we are being brainwashed to do more and more these days, is sooooooooooooo damn wrong.

We have created many parents who don't know how to be parents and the effects of that can be seen out on our streets, as so many unhappy young people seek to find the meaning of life from the bottom of a lager can..

(And for the record, I regard people in the 20s and 30s as 'young' people...because I am 346 years old these days, so this is not *just* aimed at teenagers, but there IS a huge teenage drinking problem in this country, as well as in the other age groups)

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: theleveller
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 03:40 AM

"Children, imo, should come first, not 'Careers'..."


What I believe should come first is the freedom of women (and men) the have a personal choice in how they run their lives. Working parents do not have a detrimental effect on the lives of their children so long as their needs are also catered for and the work/home balance is adjusted accordingly. Most employers recognise this these days and offer the flexibility in working hours that allow it. My wife and I both work and our two children are happy, well-adjusted kids who are doing well at school/uni and have lively and busy social lives and a wide range of interests. Far better to have parents who are happy and fulfilled and enjoying their careers as well as their home lives than to have fretting, bored, resentful parents whose only role is to pander to their children's whims. Parents are people, too!

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 04:04 AM

I admit I was wrong and apologise to Lizzie.

My prediction, some time back...
We are now at change of topic number 1 and just one cry of victimisation. I predict at least two of the former, half a dozen of the latter and at least one threat to leave altogther before the thread reaches it's inevitable closure:-)

There have been far more than three changes of topic, or tactic at least. Just off the top of my head -
Binge Drinking
The Education System
Working Mothers
Government control
Rally cry to rebel against 'them'
Comparison to Russia
(I find the last two interesting - We are to rebel against the state and yet the country that did that is castigated. Ah well...)
I am sure there are more but I gave up.

BUT - and here is the thing I apologise for - There has been only one allusion to being victimised or stalked and no call at all for the thread to be closed! My hat is off to you Lizzie. Now, if we can just work on those tangents...

:D (eG)

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 04:54 AM

Agreed, Leveller. My daughter is thriving and happy. She would not have many of the advantages and opportunities she has if I did not do the job I do - she has been to events and festivals where I was working, and taken friends along - she loves it. She has a standard of living that is possible because I work. For example, we went to Venice last year, just the two of us. It was an incredibly bonding experience and one both of us will treasure in the years to come.

I have raised a happy child who is thriving at school, who is not off her face on drink and drugs or shagging round the town. Do not undermine my choices because they are not the same ones you have made, Lizzie. I think stay-at-home mums are perfectly entitled to their choice, and I think I am equally entitled to mine. And having a bit more money around the place isn't just about being able to buy your kids possessions; it's about giving them experiences. If kids want to do out-of school activities and clubs, it's nice as a parent to be able to facilitate that. My daughter has the opportunity to do an exchange to Japan this year with her school - I will pay part of the cost, her dad will pay part, and she has to earn the rest herself. But if I was not working I couldn't afford to even think about giving her this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to go and stay with a Japanese family and see the country from the inside. I firmly believe that travel broadens the mind, and that you get a much more balanced perspective on your own culture by going and experiencing others, so this is a priceless life experience, in my opinion, and I'm glad I can give it to her.

Some of my daughter's friends have mums who have stayed home, and some have gone out to work. Can I categorically say that the ones with full-time mothers are markedly more stable and happier? Absolutely not. One of them, in fact, is round here constantly because she and her mum don't get on. In her case, her mum re-married and has two small boys, who take up a lot of her time. Their dad has also insisted that his children are privately educated, so the boys are at the local prep while the two older girls, from the first marriage, are at a state school (they can't afford for all of them to go private). Their mum is a full-time parent, but not all her children are getting the same level of parenting. So it isn't down to "working mums bad, stay-at-home mums good" - it's about individual situations, some of which work and some don't.

So, happily, for those of us in the real world (and not the one that exists inside Lizzie's head) it's not such a nightmare dystopia: it's not perfect, but for the most part our kids are okay and we're reasonably happy. As someone who stayed at home for a few years, and has variously worked part-time, full-time, in an office and at home, there is only one thing I've learned: there is no perfect solution. All you are ever doing is trading one set of compromises for another, and you have to try and choose the permutation that works best for you as a family.

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 10:36 AM

David, it's called....'conversation'.

Now this is a strange one, of course, because tell me this, why is it OK for you to go completely off tangent in a thread, but never for me?

And my posts are all connected up.

Please, don't be a hypocrite, there's a good lad.

Leveller...If you decide to have children and a career, that's fine, but, imo, the children are by far and a way the more important of the two. I have a right to feel that way, just as other women don't. It's my freedom of choice too ya'know...

What bugs me, and upsets me, is children who don't get their parents time, and this is sometimes not the parents fault because there is no option but for both parents to work, in order to pay the bills, these days more than ever before.   

But tell me, if both parents are out working, full time, and there is no grandparent around, who brings up the children?

It's just my opinion...and I did put that bit in, that women who CHOOSE to have a full time career, even when they don't need the money, and who have children as well, are depriving their children of something very special, that's all, particularly in the early years before school starts.....and I'm talking about mothers who love their children in the 'special' bit there, not ones who treat them as if they're dirt, hit them, abuse them etc.


And David, again...tell me this, if you're having a conversation in a pub, or wherever, do you stipulate, before you start, that NO-ONE is allowed to take your conversation off-topic? No, of course you don't...it's where conversations lead, down many paths...

Threads are no different, they merely become woven into a tapestry of thoughts.

It doesn't bother me one bit.

If it bothers you, then please don't read the thread, it truly is that easy.

There are a helluva lot of kids out there who don't have the love from their parents that they should, so they seek it out in 'gangs' and get led down many wrong paths....It happens.

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 10:58 AM

I have no problem at all with conversation wandering anywhere it wants, either in or out of the pub, but anyone who wants a sensible debate should stick within reasonable bounds. If you want a conversation, feel free to wander but don't then complain at the bullshit that gets spouted by everyone.

As to -

Threads are no different, they merely become woven into a tapestry of thoughts.

It doesn't bother me one bit.

If it bothers you, then please don't read the thread, it truly is that easy.

Well, saying your threads are a tapestry of thoughts is certainly one way of putting it...

It doesn't bother me in the slightest but where there is incorrect statements, flawed logic and total rubbish I cannot help but point it out. You have asked, often enough, for consideration of how your brain works. Well that is how mine works - I see bollocks, I say bollocks. Surely that doesn't bother you does it? If so, I suppose you need not read my posts. It truly is that easy.

Oh, and I don't recall ever changing the subject to try and steer people away from the crap I have spouted earlier. Not that you would do such a thing of course...

DeG

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Smedley
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 11:02 AM

A question for Lizzie: is the 'Patch Adams' that you have quoted, attacking the 'fame industry', the same one who let his life story be made into a Hollywood film starring Robin Williams ?

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 11:02 AM

Oh - one final thing

Please, don't be a hypocrite, there's a good lad.

Tell you what, Liz my dear girl, you treat everyone else with the respect you seem to expect and I will see what I can do:-)

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: theleveller
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 11:07 AM

"But tell me, if both parents are out working, full time, and there is no grandparent around, who brings up the children?"

People don't work 24 hour a day, 7 days a week. By 5 children are at school for most of the day and flexible working hours mean one or other parent is on hand when the kids come home. All my kids have gone to nursery from an early age and they have all loved it - making friends who they have kept throughout school and beyond. A big advantage is that when they do start school they are with children they have grown up with and feel very secure so it isn't a trauma. Many teachers will tell you that these children often do better, especially in the early years, as they have greater independence and social skills, are better at sharing and work much better in groups than those who have spent all their time at home. I can vouch for all of that.

The other benefit is that time then spent with parents is real 'quality' time and the kids experience a greater variety of activities.

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Folkiedave
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 12:54 PM

But tell me, if both parents are out working, full time, and there is no grandparent around, who brings up the children?

And if there is only one parent around for whatever reason, and there is no grandparent around, who earns the money?

Or is the state (the nanny state you constantly denigrate) supposed to provide the money for food, rent, clothing whilst the lone parent stays at home looking after the children?

Parents do split up, people fall in love with other people, families break up etc. What happens then?

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 01:06 PM

"A question for Lizzie: is the 'Patch Adams' that you have quoted, attacking the 'fame industry', the same one who let his life story be made into a Hollywood film starring Robin Williams ? "

Yes, that's the man. I believe the money went to help the building of Patch's hospital...which he has given his life to raising funds for.

Patch Adams is NOT a superstar. He does not seek publicity.

How do I know?

Because I spoke to those in his office a while back now, about making a Myspace page, in his name. I wanted to try to get Patch's message out as far as I could...and, having noticed there was no page for either Patch or his Geshundheit Institute I thought I'd see if I could help.

They told me they hadn't seen him for ages, because he just 'takes off' and does his own thing. They too were desperate for him to promote himself more on the internet, but Patch doesn't like computers, won't ever deal with them and doesn't carry a phone either.

In short, when Patch is out, he's OUT..and that's that.

What is he out doing?

He's out visiting patients, making the laugh, caring for them. He's out spreading his message, about changing the way we think of medicine and caring for the sick and dying. He's out trying to recruit more and more doctors to think as he does, and this isn't difficult for him to do.   He travels around the world doing this, on his own, with no camera crew, no TV crew, occasionally phoning into his office to see how things are going.

Read his book, Smedley.

And please, don't criticise Patch Adams, because he's a wonderful man!

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 01:12 PM

And somewhere in here is a thread I started about Patch, but I don't know how to find it...GRRRR....lot of info in there though..

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 01:53 PM

Spot on, leveller. Even if flexible working isn't available and a *gasp* childminder is used, you're usually talking about a 1 - 2 hour window in between a child getting home and a parent doing the same. Not exactly running feral, are they?

But Lizzie, your quickness to make value and moral judgements about the way that many of us raise our children does raise certain questions in itself. After all, you've made a choice to keep your children out of school (I won't say "home educate" them, because to me that implies giving lessons, monitoring progress and having some kind of teaching structure, none of which you agree with), so you are presumably at home with your kids all day and are responsible for supervising and spending time with them 24/7. But between your numerous fan pages, your huge Myspace, and all the thousands of words you have written about bands, not to mention the many, many lengthy diatribes and skirmishes on various websites, you must have spent absolutely thousands of hours on line in recent years.

So instead of worrying about who is raising our kids, I'm just wondering, Lizzie: who's raising yours?

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 03:14 PM

What the binge drinkers need is a little self discipline. They get that by learning that if they step outside bounds it is unacceptable - and has adverse consequences. Consistently.

Women are human beings too and entitled to make their own choices. They are not rentawombs.

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Bryn Pugh
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 04:58 AM

In making this post I am probably leaving meself wide open for a pasting ; but

In the days when I could take alcohol (many moons ago, now, the gods be praised) I never seat out to get deliberately pissed, nor did anyone I was at Folk Club with. Oh, it happened - with bells on.

Which is why I am at a loss to understand the young'uns of today.

Pissed at 10 p.m

Legless by 11p.m.

Fighting at midnight.

Carried home on a door at 1 a.m. via A & E, having set out to get deliberately pissed.

When I was serving my apprenticeship to a pisshead, if I or any youngster went out of order, we were liable not only to get barred out, but also to get battered by older men who were put out by such conduct.

I still do go to a pub, for live music and/or a meal, but what I would consider conduct out of order is no longer the subject of sanctions (consequences, as Richard said - nice to see you are back), but seems to be

positively encouraged.

I think I have become my parents :-).

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 05:00 AM

So we are now on Patch Adams? how did that happen?

I gather we are not allowed to criticise anyone that Lizzie considers to be wonderful? Can I make that same request please? I think Folkiedave is wonderful (he bought me a pint once) so please do not criticise him. Thank you.

:D (eG)

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 05:13 AM

"I think Folkiedave is wonderful (he bought me a pint once) so please do not criticise him. Thank you."

No surprises there, then.



And if you want to see why Patch Adams was mentioned, I suggest you read the thread and follow the conversation properly, rather than nipping in and out of it simply to 'Lizziebash'.
Thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 05:55 AM

I suggest you read the thread and follow the conversation properly

Following one of your conversations is beyond me I'm afraid, Liz. I would rather stick pins in my eyes. Probably as a result of being a product of the education system...

Thank you.

:D (eG)

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 05:58 AM

Glad to see I am back on track with my victimisation prediction though:-)

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Folkiedave
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 09:57 AM

And naturally as a Yorkshire person I would buy Dave a beer. We started off on a binge drinking session but after he bought me one we stopped.

Such generosity between folk normally separated by the Pennines is not seen as normal. United by a common foe.

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 10:48 AM

""Elitism" lies not in enabling the able, but in devaluing those other than the elite. Subsidising the opera while doing nothing to aid (and indeed much to attack) folk music is elitist.""

No need to lecture me on the definition of elitism, which is of course, exactly as you state.

It is New Labour which needs educating, since the use the false spectre of "elitism" (their meaning of the word) to stifle the able and keep the young as uniformly dumb as is necessary to prevent their seeing the shortcomings of the party in government.

At the age of eleven, I was way ahead of my younger brother, who was not academically inclined, so I won a scholarship to a top school and he went to that old fashioned second choice, a Secondary modern. We both achieved the best we could and finished highly placed at "O" and "A" level GCE.

He is a very talented artist and teacher, who achieved a masters in fine arts working from home.

I, being low on ambition, eventually qualified as a Carpenter and Joiner.

My point is that he would have floundered at grammar school, and I did not, but neither of our careers were defined or confined by that difference.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 11:03 AM

BTW Lizzie, just for information, and without any implied criticism, the man you were quoting re giving the populace someone to fear, was not that amiable buffoon Hermann Goering.

It was the rather less personable, but cunning and manipulative Josef Goebbels.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: theleveller
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 11:04 AM

Don, I'm sure that's the experience of many people. I have a friend who, having failed her 11-plus, went to a Sec Mod where she came across inspirational teachers. She is now a Judge.

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Edthefolkie
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 12:04 PM

I must step forward and defend Nottingham, the well known terror city where you WILL get your hair parted by a dum dum bullet twice a week (according to the redtops and certain TV programmes).

The city has always had its rough bits - for a pretty accurate flavour of the 1950s, read "Saturday Night and Sunday Morning" or watch the film. In the 60s I went to a very well regarded school which was unfortunately situated in one of the city's red light districts, and ladies touted for business at all hours. Then and later it was pretty easy to obtain purple hearts, black bombers, dexies, wacky baccy etc in very respectable cafes (remember the Kardomah anybody?) If you go back further to the early years of the 19th century you will find that there were 156 inns and beer houses in a very small area. "Nottingham Lambs" were then known as groups of chaps you didn't cross on a Saturday night!

Reference the current binge drinking issue, I don't actually believe the current "300 pubs in a square mile" canard, but certainly there are some truly horrible drinking factories now. But who closed down the 4 traditional Nottingham breweries which owned their pub estate and didn't hound managers to maximise drink sales? Big Business helped by politicians. Who aims their marketing they do, whatever they say) and powerful sickly sweet alcopops at kids who can't take their drink? Big Business again. Who owns half of Burton on Trent? Coors, a multi national. Who separated pubs from brewers and encouraged the advent of pile-em-in alcopop bars? Politicians. Who   
can get these places closed down? Police and the justices. Who don't? Police and the justices.

Nottingham's no different from anywhere else really - these days it's all about making a fast buck and keeping the shareholders happy. But there are plenty of places even in 2010 where you can enjoy a pleasant pint and, whisper it, go to a good gig - without danger to your life or sanity. Try the Maze, the Vic, Rock City (well maybe not!) and many others.

Subject: RE: BS: Binge Drinking reforms....UK
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 07:07 PM

""Don, I'm sure that's the experience of many people. I have a friend who, having failed her 11-plus, went to a Sec Mod where she came across inspirational teachers. She is now a Judge.""

That's my point. This government regards that kind of education system as elitist, but the results do show that, with proper teachers the fact that they are not constantly chasing high fliers actually helps the Secondary Modern pupils to achieve their potential, rather than being left to quietly sink out of sight.

The biggest problem with education today is not elitism, nor discipline, nor absenteeism, nor ineffectual teaching.

It is GOVERNMENT!

Head teachers have been turned into bursars, and administrators, with no time to spare for managing educators. Teachers have been turned into bureaucratic slaves, and buried under an avalanche of government paperwork.

If they would only butt out and let educators educate as they once did, then Britain would again be able to supply the rest of the world with the finest scientists, engineers, inventors, and educators, just as we did in the fifties and sixties.

Remember the "Brain Drain"?.....All those guys were educated in the Grammar/Secondary Modern system, and many of the best of them came from the Secondary Modern part of the system.

Don T.