Student protest, London 10 November

[I1L2T3]

You've made it clear you have the time and ability to work if you are raising money for charity. You've also made it clear you would not do the same in an actual job as you would have to contribute to the state.

 

What else but a benefit cheat do you expected to be regarded? You can work, you have the time and ability to work, but you refuse to as to do so would in your words you would not wish to give money to "the government through taxes"

 

What makes you think you have the right to "choose" not to work? What makes you think I and the majorioty of the forum shouldfund your choice through our hard earned taxes?

 

I watched my wife's dad go from a successful businessman to somebody who gave up 20 years of his working life to care for a wife who had her life destroyed by MS. He's dedicated his life to her. It's been a progressive disease so his ability to get back to work has reduced year on year. Eventually they did end up living on benefits about 15 years in.

 

Like I said you can never judge until you know all the facts.

[go4it]

Answer the question. How much did you pay for your education at uni? If you paid nothing how exactly does that make you more qualified to comment than students today that have to pay? What makes you better?

 

If you asked the question in the first place you would have been a lot clearer.

 

I had to pay. I also accessed a fund from the University. These funds existed before and will continue to exist. It was a well established University with a very strong Alumni.

 

Students today can access these funds. They need to save for their education but should they need a boost there are many avenues to go down.

 

Students throw money around these days without knowing its value. They need to ask themselves 'Is a surf board design degree at the Metropolitan University of Donald Duck' worth 20K?

[go4it]

I watched my wife's dad go from a successful businessman to somebody who gave up 20 years of his working life to care for a wife who had her life destroyed by MS. He's dedicated his life to her. It's been a progressive disease so his ability to get back to work has reduced year on year. Eventually they did end up living on benefits about 15 years in.

 

Like I said you can never judge until you know all the facts.

 

Yes but you are referring to caring for an adult. The wonderful state system in this country will provide schooling for all children, including those with special needs.

 

Do full time carers still get their allowance if their child attends school? As the state is paying for specialist staff to look after the child.

 

If you've chipped into the pot like your wife's dad I see no problem. Obviously there are some who have never chipped into the pot and never intend to.

[I1L2T3]

If you asked the question in the first place you would have been a lot clearer.

 

I had to pay. I also accessed a fund from the University. These funds existed before and will continue to exist. It was a well established University with a very strong Alumni.

 

Students today can access these funds. They need to save for their education but should they need a boost there are many avenues to go down.

 

Students throw money around these days without knowing its value. They need to ask themselves 'Is a surf board design degree at the Metropolitan University of Donald Duck' worth 20K?

 

You've put my mind at rest. I'm glad you paid. I was really worried for a minute I'd contributed to your education because with all due respect it wasn't looking great value for money.

[Rupert_Baehr]

I couldn't belive the girl they interviewed on Look North - who worked for the Leeds uni newspaper. She said although she doesn't condone the use of violence, the government wasn't listening, so what more could the protesters do?

 

Yes I agree with her too.

 

Unfortunately - as large numbers of those at the demo don't seem to understand - In a system of democratically elected government, nobody gets their own way all of the time.

 

Most people accept that although they may not like what the democratically-elected government does, that government is entitled to govern. The lady from the Leeds University newspaper and many of the others seem to think that although others have to 'stick to the rules,' those rules don't apply to them and if they don't like what the government is doing they are entitled to use violence to change government policy.

 

I do hope somebody (like the courts) changes their mind.

 

Aaron Porter (the President of the NUS) was wringing his hands on TV and bleating that extremists had hijacked the protest he organised.

 

Well in that case, he didn't do a very good job of organising it did he?

 

Everybody is entitled to protest - but everybody is also entitled to take responsibility for their actions.

 

Perhaps the NUS will pay for the cost of the damage caused because they did such a poor job of controlling their demo?

 

Apparently, some of the 'demonstrators' were throwing things - including fire extinguishers - off rooves at policemen.

 

I wonder whether those people can be identified? I wonder what the chance would be of bringing a successful prosecution for attempted murder?

[donkey]

I wonder if all the hypocrites who got a free uni education but are unwilling to pay towards the next generation's will be helping reduce the deficit by paying their grants back? I think we all know the answer to that question. Support the Selfish Party for the selfish people! I think the students were damn right to kick off! This government has no mandate to act as they are. It represents the interests of a priviledged minority.

[Tony]

Everybody is entitled to protest

Does it still work like that under the Prevention of Terrorism Act?

 

http://www.statewatch.org/news/2001/sep/15ukterr.htm

[I1L2T3]

People have the right to non-violent protest. It went too far today. Let's face it a broken window can be replaced but violence against the person is wrong.

 

If somebody hit a copper no excuses they have to account for themselves. Likewise if they endangered people by using missiles.

 

But.....the key point from today is the anger that was articulated. The government will ignore that at their peril.

[donkey]

The large bulk of the electorate had exactly that in mind when they voted against Labour. Why is your opinion more important than all those millions?

 

Have you talked to any Lib Dem voters since the election? Most of them feel betrayed (because they were). The only people who voted for what the government are doing are the 34% who voted tory. That leaves 66% who didn't vote for it. Hardly a mandate.

[Rupert_Baehr]

Does it still work like that under the Prevention of Terrorism Act?

 

http://www.statewatch.org/news/2001/sep/15ukterr.htm

 

Good question ... but I doubt that any of this lot will be prosecuted under that act.

 

Tourists with cameras taking photographs of the Houses of Parliament (a government building, a potential terrorist target) might find themselves in trouble though