|
Post by aquacultured on Feb 18, 2018 1:16:40 GMT 1
What I get from mrsonde’s posts on this thread is that he despises those public servants who trouser loadsamoney (debatable), and also those who definitely don’t (proven). Because the latter are inferior, in his warped mentality, even tho they contribute rather than trouser. Which surely he should applaud (even while despising).
Carry on, unpaid public servants: don't let the cynical bastard grind you down.
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Feb 22, 2018 0:01:15 GMT 1
Shame I wasn't talking about town councils, or knitting circles. If you were, you should have made that clear, Mr.Pooter. You were a "civil servant", weren't you, and not a postman or gas board trench-digger? If you were just a humble postie, or you packed wardrobes for the state-owned Pickfords' national removal service, I do apologise for any perceived criticism. Idiotic, even desperate, as anyone can see. Pretending to have been a county councillor? Desperate might be a word for it, I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Feb 22, 2018 0:30:16 GMT 1
I've never made that assertion, and you can't provide a single link to where I have. What I've said, and will always say, is that the alleged "use" is largely besides the point. There is no measure of it, and no constraint to it, except the limit of social collapse - you can employ people to dig holes in the ground, until you run out of people earning the money to make it possible.
Yes. Even if you were employed while you did so in a private school, which you weren't.
These days, less and less. It took a very long time to wither away though - it was normal when I was at school. If you were in the O-level stream you did Latin and usually a proper language - French, German, or Spanish. This was the standard throughout England and Scotland. It took an unconscionable long time before the voices asking, why on earth are we wasting everyone's time and resources teaching this stuff, became loud enough for it to be gradually dropped. The same could have been said of most of the standard current curriculum, and it will take a similar length of time before it changes.
I doubt it. It's not the "Latin" bit that sells them, any more than "Ancient Greek" would, though that was once standard too, or "Serbo-Croat".
No. Studying anything is "worth" something. That's not the issue.
I think it's far far too expensive. There are many many things far more vital to learn to waste time on such matters, if you value "education" at all. Most teachers do not - I'd add "of course" to that, but given this argument and my interlocuter, there's sadly no of course about it. Put it this way - while all the children who were forced to go through your education process, all those hundreds of hours of drilling and memorising and testing, they could instead have been learning a skill, developing a talent, acquiring a competency that would have enabled them to, say, earn a living. That's framing the question in ways that would be generally understood by most, but I'd want to go further. I won't at this stage - we'll leave it at just talking about this existing system, and what it's supposed to be about.
Nope. They don't. No one gives a flying toss about Latin, believe me.
No, I don't, or even for any subject where the difference matters. But that's the system you've built and would defend.
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Feb 22, 2018 0:45:51 GMT 1
Yes, on this messageboard.
No, they couldn't, actually.
What difference does that make? The point is - you didn;t pay for them. Unless you chose to, of course, in which case you;d be the proud owner of some books, or some games, or some clothes, or perhaps a house, which you;d freely entered into an agreement to buy.
But you're not forced to work to pay for that activity, are you? At the threat of imprisonment and confiscation of your belongings. You can buy my goods if you want them or buy them elsewhere if you prefer their offerings - and that's how things get better, see?
|
|
|
Post by aquacultured on Feb 22, 2018 0:51:47 GMT 1
Idiotic, even desperate, as anyone can see. Pretending to have been a county councillor? Desperate might be a word for it, I suppose. But I didn't. Show me where I did, please. I'm quite happy not to've joined a political party just to've got a place on a principal council. Why on earth would you despise unpaid councillors who don't espouse parties? Unless you're unforgivably cynical about all public servants. Doh! I see I've answered my own question.
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Feb 22, 2018 0:56:06 GMT 1
What I get from mrsonde’s posts on this thread is that he despises those public servants Nope. That's an occasional side-effect, depending. It's the system I despise. It's called authoritarianism. Nope. I don't care how much it is. If someone bursts into my house and demands by threats and the loss of my liberty a single penny, I find it fairly despicable. This would be you, presumably? The poor downtrodden civil-servant cum councillor? It's not a question of inferior versus superior. Though as a matter of fact there is an element of that objectionable psychology - though it doesn't generally lie on my side. It's not my side of the argument that argues that "public servants" are unusually worthy and noble and self-sacrificing. Again, what they do or do not "contribute" is not the issue. The issue is the system that demands you pay for their so-called contribution, whether you recognise and applaud it or not. Hear hear, carry on! The more of you the better! You won't be allowed to get away with such undermining blackleg subversion for long of course, but have a go.
|
|
|
Post by aquacultured on Feb 22, 2018 1:07:27 GMT 1
So, the more paid public servants there are, the better.
I don't agree with that at all.
mr sonde's gone off-piste, as usual.
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Feb 22, 2018 1:08:57 GMT 1
Pretending to have been a county councillor? Desperate might be a word for it, I suppose. But I didn't. Show me where I did, please. I made an argument about my county council, and how they'd cut vital statutory services before touching their generous expenses, and generalised that to the claimed national funding crisis said to be brought about by central govt. You countered that you had been a councillor for ten years and not received such expenses. It now turns out that you weren't a county councillor at all. Yes? Do you recognise these facts? Do I have to do a retrawl? I'm not interested in your petty personal ambitions, councillor. Sigh. Look, once again: It's the ones who eat all the chocolate biscuits I'm arguing against. They're bastards. I was one, once, for a summer, looking after parks and bowling greens in Cardiff. I still have the cancres of cynicism from that experience. I earned a very nice amount, for what I did, as did all my compatriots, but for some reason I tend to think my personal benefit shouldn't enter into the argument. Whether to have can be acceptably contracted? I think not, Sir Humphrey.
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Feb 22, 2018 1:16:39 GMT 1
So, the more paid public servants there are, the better. No, that's a fairly simple logical error. It's called stupidity, in the latin. Mrsonde is losing patience with trying to debate with children.
|
|
|
Post by aquacultured on Feb 22, 2018 1:23:08 GMT 1
I also can't be bothered to trawl back.
So just explain why you said all councillors in the country were trousering it, while (you say) you were only talking about IoW councillors.
Truth is important, after all. And untrousered cllrs are beneath contempt.
|
|
|
Post by aquacultured on Feb 22, 2018 1:42:29 GMT 1
I'm sick of people like mrsonde misrepresenting or just twisting everything they read, to present another version of reality.
No wonder hardly anyone posts here any more.
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Feb 22, 2018 2:03:04 GMT 1
I also can't be bothered to trawl back.  A rare shaft of wisdom sir. Oh, okay. I don't give a toss about parish and town councillors. No one does. That's not because of any "despising" - it's because generally they don't charge an arm and a leg for their alleged "contribution". Most sensible people know full well what they're doing there - and we tolerate it, mostly, until it gets too out of hand. The point is: the damage they can do is within tolerable limits. By law, that is - remove that, and god knows what they'd do.
|
|
|
Post by aquacultured on Feb 22, 2018 2:07:53 GMT 1
Oh dear. So you've never given it any thought.
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Feb 22, 2018 2:11:50 GMT 1
I'm sick of people like mrsonde misrepresenting or just twisting everything they read, to present another version of reality. Like when? You're like Hillary, complaining about politicians being corrupt. It's always more comfortable to withdraw when you're defeated, and not engage when you're certain to be. This is the one hope. You liberal-lefties will lose, and are losing. You've controlled the media of exchange of debate since the forties - now it's all over for you. That's the real revolution going on in the world. Your ideas are simply wrong - they're not capable of countering the deluge of truth overwhelming them. Truth does matter, at least a little bit as far as people like you are concerned, remember?
|
|
|
Post by aquacultured on Feb 22, 2018 2:16:11 GMT 1
Hey, calm down.
I'm all for truth, nothing but.
|
|