BRFR Cake Stop 'breaking news' miscellany

[briantrumpet]

I definitely do not have a good enough knowledge of the sector to articulate the solution, but I think you should explain why universities are now failing. Is it because domestic students simply do not pay enough? If so, then that seems like a decent argument to increase the contribution per student. Is it because international students don't come as much? If so, then that is less straight-forward, because there needs to be an understanding why and whether fixing it will break something else. Is it because some universities simply don't appeal/ are not good enough and there is a reducing number of kids willing to be saddled with debt (note child population is decreasing from what is around year 8 I think)? If so, then the solution is not more money, it is something else, because those universities have failed, and I would be willing to consider offers. If Meta want to fund a degree in stalking/radicalising/spying then is that so bad? OK, other options could be considered.

Neither do I have a good enough knowledge to know what the sensible way forward is. That's Government's job to devise a plan, building on the successes, and seeing what's not working. Not just to let chunks go bust because it doesn't know what's really going on. The problem is that it should have been done some time ago, as things are moving very quickly at the moment, as the evidence from places such as Nottingham shows (it's much more dramatic than the Exeter situation).

 

[Stevo 666]

How many countries are able to completely protect a border? I wouldn't say the US is soft on immigration but plenty of people manage it (2.8 million in 2024). It's particularly difficult if the border agency of the country they are leaving is actively encouraging them.

According to reports 70,000 of the 72,000 have been returned.

Not sure, but Spain seems to be pretty easy to enter illegally and the country has other pull factors such as the possibility of further mass legalisation of illegal migrants which will mean that this sort of issue will continue. It's already causing problems with Schengen and I reckon it will only get worse.

 

[Stevo 666]

What - you mean send them back to Morocco?
Isn't that what they did?

What's your proposal? A 60,000 place prison in Ceuta for people duped by their Govt?

Re-read what I posted above, its pretty clear. Clearly repatriation is part of the solution for those that persist, but it's better if they don't come in the first place.

 

[Stevo 666]

Must be true. It's in the Telegraph.

Don't you think it's a bit weird that the only places reporting this are GB News and The Telegraph? It appears that the source of the information is Laura LRies at the Heritage Foundation, a US think tank pushing Project 2025.

It's almost as if there is some sort of agenda here...

I don't care if you don't like where it was reported, as I've said before. Try rebutting what the article - if you can.

 

[Pross]

Not sure, but Spain seems to be pretty easy to enter illegally and the country has other pull factors such as the possibility of further mass legalisation of illegal migrants which will mean that this sort of issue will continue. It's already causing problems with Schengen and I reckon it will only get worse.

If by Spain you mean a tiny enclave attached to a different continent to its mainland. It doesn't follow that they can then get to mainland Europe though and as a country they get around 60,000 "irregular" migrants a year despite being geographically more vulnerable to those looking to get out of Africa. The US by contrast with it's attempts at being tough had 2.8 million arrivals in 2024 of which less than 700,000 were repatriated.

As for causing problems in the Schengen countries, that's politics for you - a country sees and opportunity to use a situation to push its narrative such as a right-wing government in Italy using the situation for their anti-immigration propoganda even though virtually all those that crossed the border being returned within days. There is an element that bought into the whole thing and now seem unable to accept that they believed a load of exaggerated claims.

 

[icowden]

I don't care if you don't like where it was reported, as I've said before. Try rebutting what the article - if you can.

I did. I pointed out that there are no reliable news sources publishing it.

 

[Pross]

Bit of an odd one that happened locally last Thursday with bits slowly getting released (all of which have confirmed immediate local rumours)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy9w1wedwj4o

The road was closed for investigation afterwards which was expected to take a day or two but finally reopened late last night. It was a bit of an issue for a nearby estate of around 2,000 homes (including my daughter's house) as it was one of only two proper roads serving the estate and the other was already closed for gas main works that would have taken a couple of days to safely backfill (longer than they originally thought the investigation would take). In the meantime it has been taking people around an hour to move less than a mile using the third route which is a single track. I guess they started to re-evaluate what they considered an essential car journey as a result but no doubt will forget again within a few days. I'm sure roads have reopened quicker than that following major terrorist incidents so have no idea why it took them 5 days in this instance.

 

[Pblakeney]

For some perspective, the UK model is not dissimilar to the US state universities or funding in Canada.

I looked up two examples I sort of rubbed shoulders with. If you live in Washington (state) tuition fees for an undergrad.are about US$13k per annum. $44k forgot of state students. At UBC in Canada, domestic undergrads (not limited by their province) pay about CA$7k per annum.

The balance of funding comes from federal, state and provincial grants.

On this one, PP, it seems that even less regulated countries recognise the intrinsic value of education and academia.

The key difference in the US is that they have a parallel system of private institutions. (Not sure about Canada). But in the US these existed first I think, and they in any case also receive federal funding. I am going to guess that the same applies to some of the more sketchy US institutions, but that there are also bodies that call themselves "university of the latter day Zarquonists" or somesuch that are just private bodies.

But for most purposes, there is no such thing as a fully privatised university in the US or Canada and all of their funding models are "hybrid".

Attendance rates at undergraduate level are similar for all three, and from memory I think that a lot of comparative countries are in the same range.

The UK is interesting in that it is fairly expensive (comparable to US state universities, but in an economy with lower wages and higher tax), but not at the point of delivery. The UK government therefore.funds.in advance and clawsoney back later. As we know but can't explain to the masses, most undergraduates never pay it back, so the actual fees are likely much closer to Canada's.

Personally I think Canada has it about right. And the US model is already at least incompatible with the UK economy - most aspiring parents have to build up a sizeable college fund (professionals I interact with are aiming for $100-$150k per child) and/or students end up with sizeable loans they are paying back well into their 30s. It's one of those hidden taxes in tried to explain to RC back in the BR days.

No issue with your general point but maybe replace "UK" with "England"?

 

[briantrumpet]

I suspect Bluesky's days are numbered - user figures are dropping quite dramatically.

https://techcrunch.com/2026/08/11/b...hrinking-as-its-focus-expands-beyond-the-app/

I still think that one of the big reasons is that for not-big-name users there's virtually zero visibility, and Bluesky's system doesn't seem to go "You've clicked on this person's link, so let's make sure you see their posts in your feed in future". So although prominent journos get really good following and interaction, everyone else is effectively overlooked, and it feels like whimpering into a void. It gets to a point where normal people will give up bothering to post. I've kept posting there, almost out of weird fascination with how crap it is for 'building an audience': although I've got 784 followers, it's an unusual post that gets more than five likes and a single comment. In other words, I don't think even followers get my posts in their feeds. They've missed the central part of early Twitter where networks of like-minded people built up mutual audiences and lots of interaction.

As I've said before, the contrast with Facebook is stark. Obviously they weaponise their algorithms, because it pays them to. I gather that their 'Threads' is much bigger than Bluesky, but when I tried it it was just as nuts as X or the community groups on Facebook, and was rubbish for actual serious news, which is the main reason I do Bluesky (and used to do Twitter, before it turned into a Nazi forum).

And I've still got no idea what Instagram is about.