The new PM

[PAWS]

Re: The new PM

Perhaps we should have a forum called 'behind the virtual bike shed' where people can go and tear lumps out of each other -then when it builds up on a thread, instead of clogging up an issue or, worse still, frightening off an original poster, the ‘combatants’ can go there and sort it out. Would probably need the same conditions as the stags pants’!
It may just be irritating for others on a discussion thread such as this one but on a ‘help’ thread it is simply going to scare off the original poster.
I do believe that the beauty of this site is that the advisers have the required knowledge and dispense it in a language understood by those in trouble. We are lucky to have people who learned ‘the hard way’ and that means they can advise with the best qualification in the world -experience. No need for rambling soliloquies in confusing legaleses. In most cases it is helping people to help themselves. We also have the benefit of qualified legal people who will wheel out the big guns when it comes to referencing laws and legislation or rolling around on the courtroom floor.
Helping someone in desperate need is an incredible thing to do and I am in awe of the experts on here. I just get fed up when giving advice turns into a p***ing contest.

[des8]

Re: The new PM

I'm quite sad (some might say a sad person!) because in the past 6 months we have seen posts on this forum unlike previously.
It was not unusual for different viewpoints to be expressed, but there would be little if any rancour.
However we now seem to have a member who insists at all times that his approach is the correct and only way (even when it obviously isn't) and then by implication denigrates everyone elses educational attainments compared to his own, (and this is done when no one else boasts about them)
Finally he states he doesn't care about criticism... "it's like water off a duck's back"
Sounds a little like Jeremy Corbyn.... doesn't understand adverse comments.

[leclerc]

Re: The new PM

We did not vote for this prime minister.............even less so & just when we need to be careful with foreign affairs it becomes obvious we as a country are prepared to appoint a "buffoon" (unelected) to further our cause.

Is this the best of a bad job or a complete joke.........................perhaps a little of both ?

If we had an election to cover the unelected...........then where is the competition ?

Fred, I have to be honest and say the important stuff he won't be in charge of, re foreign affairs. However, what a baptism of fire he has had in the last few days.

The problem is that Labour had Gordon Brown, the Condem coalition introduced the fixed parliament act which means the next election is 2020 and yet the opposition are so opposed to their leader that god knows how they can even think of winning anything at the moment.

I still think that it is the best time in the world at the moment for people who take an interest in politics because post brexit we have seen what a vacuum in power can lead to. Now that one part of that vacuum is dealt with the then the coming months and years ahead will be interesting times. Personally I'm excited as to what will come rather than fearful of the future...

[Diana M]

Re: The new PM

I enjoy following this thread but I've not posted because my Mother brought me up to never discuss politics or religion. I was born in the '50s.

This is my stock answer (spot the segue) to anyone who criticizes me (it happens a lot) or expresses a negative view of what I do or say*

*disclaimer this is my personal view

[Fred]

Re: The new PM

Fred, I have to be honest and say the important stuff he won't be in charge of, re foreign affairs. However, what a baptism of fire he has had in the last few days.

The problem is that Labour had Gordon Brown, the Condem coalition introduced the fixed parliament act which means the next election is 2020 and yet the opposition are so opposed to their leader that god knows how they can even think of winning anything at the moment.

I still think that it is the best time in the world at the moment for people who take an interest in politics because post brexit we have seen what a vacuum in power can lead to. Now that one part of that vacuum is dealt with the then the coming months and years ahead will be interesting times. Personally I'm excited as to what will come rather than fearful of the future...

This is not at all exciting, it is a disaster which may well work out for some but not the majority.

[charitynjw]

Re: The new PM

I enjoy following this thread but I've not posted because my Mother brought me up to never discuss politics or religion.
Or the 's' word!
Ankles should be neither seen or heard.
(Or is that chilblains?)

(Nb......this is an officially certified valuable opinion)*
I was born in the '50s.

This is my stock answer (spot the segue) to anyone who criticizes me (it happens a lot) or expresses a negative view of what I do or say*

*disclaimer this is my personal view
*See above
:taunt:

####

[Openlaw15]

Re: The new PM

I'm quite sad (some might say a sad person!) because in the past 6 months we have seen posts on this forum unlike previously.
It was not unusual for different viewpoints to be expressed, but there would be little if any rancour.
However we now seem to have a member who insists at all times that his approach is the correct and only way (even when it obviously isn't) and then by implication denigrates everyone elses educational attainments compared to his own, (and this is done when no one else boasts about them)
Finally he states he doesn't care about criticism... "it's like water off a duck's back"
Sounds a little like Jeremy Corbyn.... doesn't understand adverse comments.

I never insulted anyone per se and simply would not - so if certain other could please stop twisting things this would be rather helpful. It is rather troll-like for certain persons to distinguish self from others where they insist I "denigrate everyone elses educational attainments compared to his own.' Well, I have not told any one what qualification I hold regardless of their curious little endeavours to do so despite they may have alluded to their own. Do you know why not, simply because a qualification is a piece of paper and essentially means little or nothing, in my view.

I merely challenged the view that all degrees are alike and if it is easier to get a 2.1 or a 1st in any university degree, in my view it's a softer degree obviously. I am entitled to my opinion. I merely suggested what I did about law owing to personal experience of studying it in detail, and backed it up with evidence: Debra S. Austin, D. S, (2014), Killing Them Softly: Neuroscience Reveals How Brain Cells Die from Law School Stress and How Neural Self-Hacking Can Optimize Cognitive Performance, 59 LOY. L. REV. 791, 794.

I have never said that my approach is the best so if these others could please stop personalising things as, to be fair, they are rather frequent occurrences, I might add, it would be a good thing. Do you know why I never personalise things, because it's irrelevant to do so. To be honest, said others don't seem to know the difference between a genuine critique of a subject like higher education reform and its problems, and any personal expression or inference I were to make.

[Crazy council]

Re: The new PM

It seems May has given sturgen a way to block brexit. Maybe to head off election calls. I still doubt we will brexit but the outlook if we do is looking a lot less gloomy for us than the remaining eu.

Although I lifle long labour supporter. I think I would give my vote to May atm to work out a good deal for is whatever the outcome or actions around brexit.

Although bafoonish in the media and personal life. Borris seems very clever. And Davis seems to have a plan and timetable for implementation

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...itics-36819182

[JulieM]

Re: The new PM

Openlaw
The article you quoted , in my view , does not say just how wonderfully cerebral law is but is a damning indictment of how law is taught and practised. It discusses the high levels of poor mental health amongst lawyers and characteristics many lawyers demonstrate and looks at ways to challenge that. It seems to say that the problem is self perpetuating because people who teach and coach lawyers have been through the same process themselves. It further explains how some progressive law schools and companies are trying to help this by giving help. It is quite damming of the culture of law school. I was able to find it online via the library even though your referencing style is very different to mine.

On another note when you talk about Webers work on McDonaldisation I assume you mean the work by Ritzer entitled McDonaldization of Society which was a continuation of Weber's work on rationalisation. Weber died long before McDonalds was even thought of.

With regard to insulting people's education you do that on a regular basis, the most recent was Amethyst when you said that law modules were no where near as difficult as the law you studied....I paraphrase.

If if I may offer an opinion, when giving advice, particularly on legal matters, try to give it in plain English so that an average person can understand it. The majority of people on here are not trained in law

[JulieM]

Re: The new PM

It seems May has given sturgen a way to block brexit. Maybe to head off election calls. I still doubt we will brexit but the outlook if we do is looking a lot less gloomy for us than the remaining eu.

Although I lifle long labour supporter. I think I would give my vote to May atm to work out a good deal for is whatever the outcome or actions around brexit.

Although bafoonish in the media and personal life. Borris seems very clever. And Davis seems to have a plan and timetable for implementation

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...itics-36819182

There is no doubt Boris is highly intelligent but I worry how he will connect with other foreign ministers, even though his role has been diluted.
May was the best of a bad lot in my opinion and while I will continue to vote conservative I am reserving judgement.

I do do hope she can find a way not to leave the EU

[leclerc]

Re: The new PM

It seems May has given sturgen a way to block brexit. Maybe to head off election calls. I still doubt we will brexit but the outlook if we do is looking a lot less gloomy for us than the remaining eu.

Although I lifle long labour supporter. I think I would give my vote to May atm to work out a good deal for is whatever the outcome or actions around brexit.

Although bafoonish in the media and personal life. Borris seems very clever. And Davis seems to have a plan and timetable for implementation

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...itics-36819182

Under the devolution deal, all devolved parliament have a say in Brexit and negotiations with the EU. However, Sturgeon came across strong when the rest of UK politicians seemed weak. Unfortunately for her, she is not allowed to trigger an independence vote without the consent of the UK Parliament. That is not going to happen. However, May can promise to protect Scottish trade interests but certainly not have a situation in which there is one leg in and one leg out otherwise we'll be shaking it all about and Scotland wants out.

[wales01man]

Re: The new PM

Why are we now hearing more arguments from Politicians Re, Brexit The country has voted to leave and that's the result same as the vote that put Sturgeon into the Scottish parliament has she ever argued that result was wrong and the second placed candidate should have here seat???

[Openlaw15]

Re: The new PM

Under the devolution deal, all devolved parliament have a say in Brexit and negotiations with the EU. However, Sturgeon came across strong when the rest of UK politicians seemed weak. Unfortunately for her, she is not allowed to trigger an independence vote without the consent of the UK Parliament. That is not going to happen. However, May can promise to protect Scottish trade interests but certainly not have a situation in which there is one leg in and one leg out otherwise we'll be shaking it all about and Scotland wants out.

Devolution is limited to certain areas whereas 'reserved matters' is for Parliament. Scotland doesn't really have a say in Br-exit independently as it surrendered its sovereignty to England in the early 1700s, which helped make the UK into a Union; but more recently, in 1998, Parliament devolved limited power back to Scotland and other countries in the Union. Entering into Treaties is a reserved matter for UK Parliament and not Scotland unless Scotland successfully votes to leave the Union, that is the UK.

[JulieM]

Re: The new PM

To be pendantic , the act of union created Great Britain and not the United Kingdom. The United Kingom is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Devolution did devolve some powers to Scotland including tax varying powers and some primary legislation but what is often forgotten is that the UK parliament can over rule anything decided by the Scottish Parliament or Welsh assembly..

Northern Ireland is a different kettle of fish though as it is governed by the power sharing laid down in the good Friday agreement which guarantees seats on the ruling executive for the main factions. This is similar to the government of Belgium where different groups are still represented at executive level.

Nicola Sturgeon can claim to have a greater mandate as the SNP were elected via a form of PR unlike Westminster. Her claims for a new independence referendum are imp rhetoric as she has no power to call one and short of a revolution I can't see it happening.

[Openlaw15]

Re: The new PM

Openlaw
The article you quoted , in my view , does not say just how wonderfully cerebral law is but is a damning indictment of how law is taught and practised. It discusses the high levels of poor mental health amongst lawyers and characteristics many lawyers demonstrate and looks at ways to challenge that. It seems to say that the problem is self perpetuating because people who teach and coach lawyers have been through the same process themselves. It further explains how some progressive law schools and companies are trying to help this by giving help. It is quite damming of the culture of law school. I was able to find it online via the library even though your referencing style is very different to mine."

Well, the 2014 source comes from Westlaw (USA) database and the citation provided has enough detail for an online search. The abstract is: "Law is a cognitive profession, and the legendary stressors in legal education and the practice of law can take a tremendous toll on cognitive capacity:" ibid Austin (2014). The mental health aspect is that law is very stressful - simply because it's tremendously cerebral - ie too much thinking. What do we mean by hard: "..“most lawyers hate[d] law school,” describing it as a “hazing ritual” that yields law graduates with more mental problems than they had when they started school. [FN7] He complains that law school is not a transformative educational experience, but one that traumatizes and breaks people: “When I say that law school breaks people I mean that almost nobody comes out of law school feeling better about themselves, although many come out much worse - caustic, paranoid, and overly competitive:" Austin, D. S. (2014) cites Litowitz, D.

"On another note when you talk about Webers work on McDonaldisation I assume you mean the work by Ritzer entitled McDonaldization of Society which was a continuation of Weber's work on rationalisation. Weber died long before McDonalds was even thought of."

Yes I am well acquainted with McDonaldisation, its author and the link to Weber's rationalism? You attack the detail of my sentences but leave the point, which was the premise of my argument intact. My point was that owing to the McDonaldisation of society, there is a somewhat delegated responsibility, ie lawyers on the cheap - or efficient curriculums. You did not make a response to the salient point, however.

"With regard to insulting people's education you do that on a regular basis, the most recent was Amethyst when you said that law modules were no where near as difficult as the law you studied....I paraphrase."

Actually, I never questioned and would never question Amethyst's (Sharon's) or anyone else's education or qualifications per se. I know how hard Sharon works/ will work because besides completing all the LLB modules, I've also completed optional law modules. Regardless, on the same thread, you can clearly see that I provided tips on how Sharon could develop/ improve her performances to build upon her underlying abilities, to obtain better grades when producing her law assignments, which will also equip her person to perform sufficiently for her LLB modules, a big jump up in terms of cognitive skills and practical skills. I do not make personal inferences about you or your qualifications so please address your response to be in proportion (or pro rata) the thing being discussed.

"If if I may offer an opinion, when giving advice, particularly on legal matters, try to give it in plain English so that an average person can understand it. The majority of people on here are not trained in law

JulieM, why is it that you and others, with intent no less, avoid my general statements and instead make personal inferences.