King Jimmeh Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 Dean, you may want to remove the EMA paragraph. Since the Coalition Government came into power, that's been scrapped. Also, Infant and Junior Schools can be separate schools as mine were. Though that having been said, they have since merged into one school. And just to confuse the Yanks, it is entirely possible to take A-Levels at College, and BTECs at Sixth Form as well (though the latter is rarer). Also the prices for Uni are right for the moment, though those may be changing (go up) in the next couple of years. Hence a lot of rage by students and young people towards the current government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted May 9, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 They scrapped the EMAs? I guess I'll leave it as is then since I did comment the current government want to get rid of them. It's fucked up. From what I'm reading the EMA has been scrapped on favour of a much lower pool of resources for "targeted" aid. Seems mostly to be for disabled then low income though. And it's up to the college/sixth form on what and how much is paid, instead of a nation wide and consistent scheme the EMA presented. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Jimmeh Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 To be honest, I can understand why EMA was brought in, but for the most part it was never used in the way it was meant to and I'm not too upset it's gone (though I never got it despite being just off). It wasn't a large enough amount to make students attend lessons if they didn't want to, and when they did get it, it was spent of cigarettes and such rather than transports and resources they require. If ya ask me, it should've been kept, but distributed on a student card or as vouchers that can only spent on transport or other things students need. Also the means of testing for whether students got the funding wasn't particularly fair either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr W Phallus Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 (edited) There were people at my school who could afford to pay for a private education, yet still were on EMA because it only measured income rather than savings, assets etc. so its not surprising they scrapped it really. Obviously it would be better if they came up with an alternative system, but spending money isn't high on the list of government priorities right now. Also, depending on what course you're doing a lot of unis don't acutally care about UCAS points, they base it soley on grades and personal statements (and sometimes interviews). Edited May 9, 2011 by Mr W Phallus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomTervo Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 Yeah the means testing of EMA was serious fail. My flatmate and homie got the largest amount you could because his parents were seperated and he only counted his Dad's income, which was technically £0 per annum as he was self employed. Pulled the same trick for Uni loans/buraries. The damn fiend. Still, I don't think EMA should be scrapped, but maybe it shouldn't be means tested. I like that suggestion of credit on student cards, Jimmeh. Still, maybe we should move this to the 'UK Politics' thread? ;P On-topic: I've got a book currently from the library called International Varieties of English. It's an interesting read if anyone's interested in the English Vs English issue. I've got an exam on the subject this Thursday, so that should be fun. It seems Noah Webster (1758-1843) was the main advocate of codifying (read: publishing, thus solidifying) spelling reform in the United States. Lots of his work exists to today- taking out unnecessary letters (colour/color, publick/public), and rearranging existing letters to make sense (centre/center). His text 'an American Dictionary of the English Language' was the first work to publish most of the ideas, and is pretty much the most significant to today- although there were a lot of omissions, and further, a lot of his new spellings didn't last very long and don't exist today (trowsers/trousers, traveler/traveller). Good shit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 his Dad's income, which was technically £0 per annum as he was self employed. Wow, that seems like an enormous loophole. Does that work for income taxes as well? Do you even have income taxes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted May 9, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 It's just something in the way EMA n such are worked out. You still get taxed normally. Two different depts. On my end my mum is as poor as dirt (well.. not that bad, but not exactly great. I'm a student, I'm richer than she is) but my dad isn't too bad off. They're divorced and I'd lived with my mum the previous 13 years of my life, it was pretty clear cut which one was the parent that is put down on the forms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 Ah, see here you have to put both parents regardless. Also for determining income IIRC it basically just asks what your income for federal income tax purposes is. So whatever you pay taxes on that's what they consider you to have for financial aid purposes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 We do have income taxes and National insurance. Everyone in the UK under the age of 65 has an £7,475 "Personal Allowance" (that is, if you earn up to that much it is free from income tax). Earnings between £7,475 and £35,000 are charged at 20% Earnings between £35,000 and £150,000 are charged at 40% Earnings over £150,000 are charged at 50%. There's also different rates for earnings from savings and dividends which I can go into further if you'd like... National Insurance directly funds things like your State Pension as well as... the additional State Pension, sometimes called the State Second Pension Jobseeker's Allowance - the 'contribution-based' element Employment and Support Allowance - the 'contribution-based' element Maternity Allowance bereavement benefits - Bereavement Allowance, Bereavement Payment and Widowed Parent's Allowance Incapacity Benefit Earnings between £139/wk and £817/wk, are charged at 12% Earnings above £817/wk, are charged at 2%. So, for the basic rate of tax payer you're looking at giving 1/4 to 1/3 of your wages to the tax man in order to fund all the free education and prescriptions to the jobless layabouts in Scotland. Lovely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted May 14, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 14, 2011 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomTervo Posted May 14, 2011 Report Share Posted May 14, 2011 Win. I use so many of those on a day-to-day basis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr W Phallus Posted May 14, 2011 Report Share Posted May 14, 2011 At the end of the day, the meaning of any one of those statements can change depending on how you say it. We Brits are just superior because we can understand this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battra92 Posted May 15, 2011 Report Share Posted May 15, 2011 It seems Noah Webster (1758-1843) was the main advocate of codifying (read: publishing, thus solidifying) spelling reform in the United States. Lots of his work exists to today- taking out unnecessary letters (colour/color, publick/public), and rearranging existing letters to make sense (centre/center). His text 'an American Dictionary of the English Language' was the first work to publish most of the ideas, and is pretty much the most significant to today- although there were a lot of omissions, and further, a lot of his new spellings didn't last very long and don't exist today (trowsers/trousers, traveler/traveller). Obligatory: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomTervo Posted May 18, 2011 Report Share Posted May 18, 2011 You are win Battra. Half for posting that, half for reminding me that I haven't read that comic for years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted June 12, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 http://www.economist.com/blogs/johnson/2011/05/euphemistically_speaking Kind of an extension on my last post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CorgiShinobi Posted June 14, 2011 Report Share Posted June 14, 2011 I found this to be very educational and entertaining. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantelope Posted June 15, 2011 Report Share Posted June 15, 2011 Jam and Jelly are actually not the same thing. Jam: A sweet mixture of fruit boiled with sugar and allowed to congeal. jelly: A clear or translucent fruit preserve, made from fruit juice and set using either naturally occurring, or added, pectin 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battra92 Posted June 15, 2011 Report Share Posted June 15, 2011 Not to be confused with Preserves or Marmalade. Preserves: Fruit cooked with sugar to protect against decay or fermentation. Marmalade: Fruit preserve made from the juice and peel of citrus fruits, boiled with sugar and water. And to add to it: A Fruit Butter refers to a process where the whole fruit is forced through a sieve or blended after the heating process (i.e. apple butter) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr W Phallus Posted June 15, 2011 Report Share Posted June 15, 2011 (edited) Not to be confused with Preserves or Marmalade. Preserves: Fruit cooked with sugar to protect against decay or fermentation. Marmalade: Fruit preserve made from the juice and peel of citrus fruits, boiled with sugar and water. And to add to it: A Fruit Butter refers to a process where the whole fruit is forced through a sieve or blended after the heating process (i.e. apple butter) Well jam, jelly, marmalade, chutney fruit curd etc. are all types of (fruit) preserve. It was my impression that Americans would refer to actual jam as jelly, for example in a PBJ sandwich, would you but in what us Brits would call jam or do you actually tend to use jelly? Oh and do you differentiate between the two types of jelly (as in jelly you would have for desert/pudding (eg. strawberry jelly) and jelly you would have with say roast meat (eg. redcurrant jelly)? Edited June 16, 2011 by Mr W Phallus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantelope Posted June 15, 2011 Report Share Posted June 15, 2011 I think most people use grape jelly for their PBJs but I could be wrong. Maybe we need a poll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CorgiShinobi Posted June 15, 2011 Report Share Posted June 15, 2011 I think most people use grape jelly for their PBJs but I could be wrong. Maybe we need a poll. I use grape, but in my experience, strawberry has a huge following as well. So yeah, I wonder if we should have a PB&J thread. What kind of peanut butter? What kind of bread? Crust or no crust? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantelope Posted June 15, 2011 Report Share Posted June 15, 2011 My wife loves creamy Peanut Butter with strawberry preserves. I like that too but on occasion I'll do crunch peanut butter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battra92 Posted June 15, 2011 Report Share Posted June 15, 2011 I think that peanut butter should be eaten straight without the contaminating jelly or jam. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr W Phallus Posted June 15, 2011 Report Share Posted June 15, 2011 Crunchy peanut butter, strawberry jam and banana. Oh and it's better on toast (or on a crumpet or pikelet) than it is in a sandwich. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted June 15, 2011 Report Share Posted June 15, 2011 Chutney! Gah what you have in England is not Chutney and I have no idea how it came to be (except it was probably a colonial thing). It's one of those borrowed words that refers to stuff indiscriminately. A chutney is not sweet. It's only sweet in England or rather the UK. Gah it's one of those words that's forever going to piss me off with the usage here because when I ask for Chutney I mean this---> I hate loanwords in all languages mostly when it's used wrong. It doesn't help that I actually spent a few years in India and also hate some of the double-word usages there (there are usages where they basically affix the English word to the local language word and then call it that and it makes no sense). Chutney is meant to go with Dosas which I wish people would add an H to since it's pronounced Doshas. It's a weird thing that I've come across with certain people in Central India which drove me nuts when I visited. My name has an sh in it and they'd skip the h sound for an S and for those names with an s they'd add an h and pronounce it like a sh... Sigh Phallus you just brought me a world of annoyance tonight XD with that chutney mention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.