Boris.....and this is a serious question.....

[flecc]

..... cooking supper whilst talking to my mam on the phone, making out a mental shopping list, getting the washing out of the machine, feeding the dogs and dusting the floor with a cloth on my foot at exactly the same time......

Yeah, we've seen the TV ad, mum on phone with the baby getting the dog food and the dog the baby's bowl.

The growth, level and seriousness of youth crime has never been so high as it's been in the last three decades. These are the decades when women have increasingly gone out to work, taken up other interests and multi-tasked their kid rearing with those. All done well? I think not.

 

[Scimitar]

Point taken Flecc but I was only thinking that 'maybe' with a woman we might get away from the 'old boy network' a bit, and also women generally are seen to be slightly more compassionate with a bit more common sense and not such a 'macho personality' to keep up or desire to save face as men have.....

And then, of course, we CAN multi task

Lynda

Yes, because we all know how compassionate that crazy bitch Thatcher was. Just dripping with it.

 

[funkylyn]

Yeah, we've seen the TV ad, mum on phone with the baby getting the dog food and the dog the baby's bowl.

The growth, level and seriousness of youth crime has never been so high as it's been in the last three decades. These are the decades when women have increasingly gone out to work, taken up other interests and multi-tasked their kid rearing with those. All done well? I think not.

Maybe not flecc.....but thats a different scenario....and lets not forget that children have two parents and many women have no choice but to work these days and have no option BUT to try to multitask to keep their families functioning and lets also remember that still the largest majority still manage to do it well.

In my case, being retired and kids having flown the nest after being well brought up, all I can say is

Supper cooked and edible, mam happy and being answered, shopping sorted, clothes ready to hang out, dogs tums full and the floor looks better ......jobs done

Lynda

 

[mike killay]

I like, but do not trust Boris.
If you stop anyone in the street and ask them to describe a bufoon, they will probably tell you about Boris.
This is how far he has penetrated the national psyche
All done for a purpose, i.e. to stand out from the usual round of would be politicians.
He is obviously a clever man and a good actor. Not re-assuring qualifications for an MP.

 

[flecc]

and lets not forget that children have two parents and many women have no choice but to work these days and have no option BUT to try to multitask to keep their families functioning

I agree many have had no option but to do both Lynda, but that doesn't make it right of course.

I've long been of the opinion that our governments are treating women as mugs. Why are they so keen for them to put the kids in nurseries and go out to work? Why are they so keen to make schooling start ever earlier, down to 3 years old pre-school even in some cases? Why are they so keen for all kids to stay on in school to at least 18?

The reason for all these is simple. Having exhausted all the possibilities of taxing men and business, the simple way to increase taxation to fund their power crazy ambitions is to double the workforce, i.e. get the women out to work paying income tax as well. Of course this puts a huge burden on women since most men quite rightly don't see why they should compensate by taking on additional duties for which they are genetically and developmentally unsuited anyway.

Any proofs? The most successful nations don't start children in school very early, more like 6 years being typical, but despite this the government insists on ever earlier start ages. The government encouragement that schools should provide breakfast clubs before school, the excuse being it's to protect kids! The constant stream of government sourced propaganda that women are better than men at so many things. This is clearly aimed at encouraging women to be more independent (in other words, go out to work). Much of this propaganda is statistically dishonest anyway, e.g. the false claim that women are safer drivers when the accident stats show that they are not, slightly the reverse in fact. And the final proof, they don't support part-time women employees at all, treating those working under 16 hours a week very poorly by denying them the usual employment protections, because they don't pay any tax of course.

All of this is clearly aimed at getting women out to work in addition to everything else they do. I look forward to the day that women wake up to what they are being conned into.

 

[funkylyn]

Yes, Mike, I like Boris as well, he is different, clever, interesting and not afraid to laugh at himself.....

I think being clever and a good actor are, however, re-assuring qualifications for an MP.
After all, in tough negotiations you need to be clever and keep your cards close to your chest and act the part well.

But, like you, I dont know how much I trust him, I would have to see a lot more of him before deciding that one, in the meantime, does he have what it takes to be super tough on the policies that are needed to stop the rot in this country....thats the really important question, and if not....who IS ?

Lynda

 

[funkylyn]

I agree many have had no option but to do both Lynda, but that doesn't make it right of course.

I've long been of the opinion that our governments are treating women as mugs. Why are they so keen for them to put the kids in nurseries and go out to work? Why are they so keen to make schooling start ever earlier, down to 3 years old pre-school even in some cases? Why are they so keen for all kids to stay on in school to at least 18?

The reason for all these is simple. Having exhausted all the possibilities of taxing men and business, the simple way to increase taxation to fund their power crazy ambitions is to double the workforce, i.e. get the women out to work paying income tax as well. Of course this puts a huge burden on women since most men quite rightly don't see why they should compensate by taking on additional duties for which they are genetically and developmentally unsuited anyway.

Any proofs? The most successful nations don't start children in school very early, more like 6 years being typical, but despite this the government insists on ever earlier start ages. The government encouragement that schools should provide breakfast clubs before school, the excuse being it's to protect kids! The constant stream of government sourced propaganda that women are better than men at so many things. This is clearly aimed at encouraging women to be more independent (in other words, go out to work). Much of this propaganda is statistically dishonest anyway, e.g. the false claim that women are safer drivers when the accident stats show that they are not, slightly the reverse in fact. And the final proof, they don't support part-time women employees at all, treating those working under 16 hours a week very poorly by denying them the usual employment protections, because they don't pay any tax of course.

All of this is clearly aimed at getting women out to work in addition to everything else they do. I look forward to the day that women wake up to what they are being conned into.

Well all I can say Flecc is that I have never needed any government to encourage me to be independant...that came from my parents....and I have passed that on to my children.

Surely all part time workers are poorly protected, not just women ?

Although the official school starting age in Spain is 6,as an example, in reality all children start part time schooling aged 3 and are encouraged into nursery schooling at 18 months !

As for women drivers, whilst I have to admit to witnessing some embarrassing parking by some women, as far as I was aware, the statistics do show that women drivers are safer over all, but I am quite happy to stand corrected, safe in the knowledge that I, myself, am a very good driver and keep my wits about me at all times looking out for bad drivers, whether male or female.

My dad taught me to drive well , 'read' the road well ahead, anticipate what may happen and to treat all other drivers as potential hazards, which has stood me in good stead in 45 years of accident free driving.

Lynda

 

[timidtom]

On of the least charismatic governments of all time gave us the National Health Service which has saved countless lives - including mine. Let the bufoons flourish as 'personalities' - government is no place for them.
Tom

 

[flecc]

Surely all part time workers are poorly protected, not just women ?

Although the official school starting age in Spain is 6,as an example, in reality all children start part time schooling aged 3 and are encouraged into nursery schooling at 18 months !

As for women drivers, whilst I have to admit to witnessing some embarrassing parking by some women, as far as I was aware, the statistics do show that women drivers are safer over all, but I am quite happy to stand corrected, safe in the knowledge that I, myself, am a very good driver and keep my wits about me at all times looking out for bad drivers, whether male or female.

Lynda

But it's women who are predominantly the part timers Lynda. so it's they who suffer the lack of protection.

As I said, the most successful countries start their kids schooling at 6, and Spain is hardly one of those! Perhaps they should stop schooling their children so early, given the mess they are in!

Insurance stats show that on a mileage basis women have more accidents, the government deceit being based on women having less accidents on the lower mileages they do on average. Of course parked cars don't have moving accidents. That's not to say women are worse drivers though, the difference is quite small and probably mostly due to the lower overall experience, since so many women learnt to drive far more recently than men on average. For example, in the earlier decades of my driving, women drivers were a rarity, and there's no substitute for experience where avoiding accidents is concerned.

P.S. Today's resignation of Louise Mensch highlights exactly what I've been saying about the unfair workload on women who go out to work and also want to care for their kids well. Sensible women that she is, she's chosen to put her family first. I wish many more would do that.
.

 

[funkylyn]

But it's women who are predominantly the part timers Lynda. so it's they who suffer the lack of protection.

As I said, the most successful countries start their kids schooling at 6, and Spain is hardly one of those! Perhaps they should stop schooling their children so early, given the mess they are in!
.

But surely they are less well protected purely because they are part time workers, not necessarily because they are women ?

Whilst I admit to being a bit horrified at my tiny spanish grandsons going off to 'school' at 18 months I have to say that they loved it and flourished.

I also fail to see how starting a childs education at 6years would make any difference to how successful a country is, the opposite I would think, seeing as 4/5 year olds are little 'sponges' ready to learn and indeed in Spain they start english lessons at that age......surely not a bad thing ?
Who are these successful countries who are denying their young children a formal education until they are 6 years old ?

As for driving, in my experience there are obviously good and bad drivers regardless of sex, and yes, directly linked to experience, or lack of.

Lynda

 

[smudger1956]

Chaos Theory.........Boris Johnson in a dark room, with an Aardvark.

 

[flecc]

But surely they are less well protected purely because they are part time workers, not necessarily because they are women ?

I also fail to see how starting a childs education at 6years would make any difference to how successful a country is, the opposite I would think, seeing as 4/5 year olds are little 'sponges' ready to learn and indeed in Spain they start english lessons at that age......surely not a bad thing ?
Who are these successful countries who are denying their young children a formal education until they are 6 years old ?

Lynda

That's precisely the point Lynda, the government knows that under 16 hours part time occupation is almost entirely that of women, so by choosing to single out that part of the employment market for discrimination, it is undeniably knowingly discriminating against women. How much clearer do I have to make it?

The countries I'm referring to with a successful history and 6 years starting school age are the USA, Canada, Germany, Norway, Denmark and Japan.

The countries I'm referring to with a successful history and 7 years starting school age are Sweden, Finland, China and that fastest growing economy, Brazil.

Why does it make a difference? Well you have to multi-task and think of more than one thing at once to understand that Lynda! . Starting school very early means less years of a mother's care and more years of institutional care, and the evidence of the inferiority of institutional care is overwhelming.

Just consider this of school start ages by percentage of countries:

Start at 4 years = 0.5%
Start at 5 years = 14%
Start at 6 years = 61.8%
Start at 7 years = 23%

You can see that the overwhelming majority of the world's educational authorities favour the later starts and almost all at 6 or older. Only one country at 0.5% favours 4 years old, our stupid government's declared aim. Truly this country is being run by idiots.

 

[funkylyn]

Well, Flecc...even using ALL of my mutitasking capabilities ..... I still dont agree with you.

Two things immediately spring to mind...China for example, parents there are actively discouraged from having more than one child and that child is usually given to the grandparents to raise so as the mothers can get straight back out to work.....not a very good example I dont think.

And in my opinion, by the time a child reaches 5 years of age,if not earlier, they are ready to explore a wider environment than just being with their mothers and also ready to learn more, including interacting with other children and learning from an early age that they are not necessarily the centre of the universe and need to learn to interact and give and take more.

I look on schooling as education for a few hours a day....NOT 'institutional care'.....that to me is something totally different

As a mother of four children I think my opinions on this are relevant and based on experience.

Lynda

 

[flecc]

But the evidence of the most successful countries says different Lynda. Your personal experience is not something to judge from for a country or a world, since it might just be evidence of you having exceptional ability.

Do you really think that 85% of the world's educationalists are wrong and just 0.5% are right?

I don't, and I don't think teachers of classes with many children are superior to a mother's individual one-on-one care in the early years.

 

[funkylyn]

WHAT evidence Flecc ??

WHAT makes you think these other countries are SO much better and successful at bringing up their children ??
......it surely cant be the terrible instances of the young people in some of these 'so called successful countries' going mad with guns and massacring youngsters in their hundreds can it ??

On what, exactly, are you judging their success ?

WHY do you think these other countries have it so right and we have it so wrong ?

This country is still a great country and a great place to bring up children for the majority of people and is still successful in so many ways

And my point is that by 5 years old the majority of children are ready for MORE than their mothers can give them, I am a great believer in staying home with your children when they are young, IF you can, and I have been very fortunate that I could, but I also knew when they were ready to go out into the wider world.

Lynda

 

[flecc]

I've given all the evidence above Lynda, and like the overwhelming majority of 85%, I don't agree that under 6 is right. The mention of guns isn't relevant and the mention of massacring hundreds of youngsters is a gross exaggeration, these killing are directly connected to gun availability. When they've been available to someone in this country, we've also had these massacres.

Already forgotten Raoul Moat? And Thomas Hamilton at the Dunblane school massacre of sixteen little children in 1996?

It's not a matter of what I think makes those mentioned countries successful, they just have obviously been so and are universally accepted as such, either in economic terms or in national happiness terms, or often both.

Where is your evidence that starting children in school at four as our government wants to is better?

Is it the one country in the world which starts children at that age, the Republic of Ireland? The way they've been "caring" for children in many schools there has been an international scandal in recent years.

 

[funkylyn]

I am merely making the point that when these things happen it only goes to prove that to consider these countries as more or less successful or happier than our country is a myth.

In the USA and Australia the school starting age varies between states and is not universal across the whole country.....so where does that leave that theory ?

I dont have any evidence that children should start school at 4 and never suggested that, my personal opinion is that the age children are ready to start school varies with the child.

In an ideal world there would be a staggered school starting age to suit the needs of the individual child.

There is also international recognition of the fact that whether they start at 4 and a half or up to 6 years has no long lasting effect on their subsequent educational prowess.

No point argueing over what you think our government 'want' the fact is, at the moment, that children start school in england depending on their birthdate which means it can be at five years or round about that age, and it seems to be working ok .

That doesnt make our country less of a success or less happier, I think that is down to a myriad of other factors apart from school starting age......thats my opinion

Lynda

 

[flecc]

And as you've seen, my opinion is very different Lynda.

We've certainly come a long way from the subject of Boris Johnson and his future!

 

[funkylyn]

We have indeed Flecc, and very interesting it was too.

Now then....back to Boris...what was your opinion on him again ? ROFLMAO....only joking

Lynda

 

[bode]

my admiration for margaret thatcher knows no bounds.

Aaaaarrrrggggghhhhhh!!!!!!!