More than 100 schools told to close buildings over safety fears

It is hardwired in, but in a work situation where it is what you are paid to do, you do not cut corners, or should not. However, many people will.

I know that at work, where my work was concerned I could be very precise and make sure everything was done as required, at home, while picky I can let things slide because I am the only one involved and will feel the results of the neglect - except I cross my fingers, hope for the best and generally get away with it.

abandon

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Joseann

^Can you put your hand on your heart and say that you have never not had a meticulously adhered to maintenance programme for everything you may own from house to hoover?^
That's different Monica.
If it is anything -buildings, swimming pool, or even outside grounds being used by people, especially children, outside my family, then yes hand on heart .ainteannce has always been my priority. If you are responsible for people's safety you have a future to protect them. You check and check again.

How often would you check the entire flat roof of a medium-sized comprehensive school? You would also need to take any internal cladding off and check the internal surfaces.

*duty

Sorry my phone is typing weirdly
from abroad!

*maintenance

Can you put your hand on your heart and say that you have never not had a meticulously adhered to maintenance programme for everything you may own from house to hoover?
That's different Monica.
If it is anything -buildings, swimming pool, or even outside grounds being used by people, especially children, outside my family, then yes hand on heart .ainteannce has always been my priority. If you are responsible for people's safety you have a future to protect them. You check and check again.

It don't disagree that this can happen under anyone's watch MOnica.

However Callistemon did say this was said "30 or so years ago". That was after a period when Thatcher moved the Conservatives closer to the far-right and set the stage for the recent laissez-faire PMs, Johnson, Truss and Sunak.

I would expect a centre-right, truly Conservative government, to have a "stitch in time" and "mend the roofs while the sun is shining" attitude. They may turn out not to be good at it but they believe Conservatives conserve. This new Whiggery lot have no actual intention to preserve or conserve.

DAR Nicee to blame everything on Mrs Thatcher but neglcting maintenance is hardwired into almost every human being as far as I can see.

Can you put your hand on your heart and say that you have never not had a meticulously adhered to maintenance programme for everything you may own from house to hoover?

What is at the heart of all this is the corruption and low construction standards endemic in the construction industry during the period these materials were considered suitable materials to use.

As this RAAC scandal has shown, and Grenfell Tower and a whole host of previous construction scandals with failing buildings, government funded projects tend to always being looking to do everything on the cheap and grab the opportunity to use cheap untetsted materials while ignoring the fact that such materials are only good to use if the highest and most meticulous construction standards for their use are followed. This combination of government cheeseparing and corruption in the building industry, ensure that these standards are not adhered to, and we can now see the results.

The responsibility for this lies with every single government since the WW2, LaBour, old and new, Conservatives of the middle of the road, almost left leaning type we had before 1979 and the market capitalists who put money before people that we have had since 1979. No party and no government can claim to be less responsible than any other for the unholy mess our public building stock is in.

I'm sure he was right. The outcome of the Thatcher right and the idea of no-government governments.

I can remember DH saying 30 or so years ago that planned maintenance in the public sectore in this country was just non-existent any longer and that we would suffer the consequences one day.

Yes, I heard that radio programme. It outlined a besetting problem, everywhere over everything - and that is that peole are almost constitutionally incapable of maintaining things properly.

Can anyone on GN put their hand on their heart and say they have never skimped on any household maintenance, put the exterior repainting off an extra couple of years. Not followed to the T the maintenance recommended by the manufacturer.

I know I cannot. Once it gets to big impersona things like construction, when budgets or profits are tight, the instinct is to delay. In this case the problem isn't helped by the fact that at the time many of these older buildings were put up, construction standards were appalling and corruption was rife.

I was politically active in the Paddington area of London in the 1960s when many of these new methods were being used in building tower blocks and talked to tenants who moved into new flats that were crumbling and poorly built - and many have already been demolished.

It is an endemic problem and I really do not know how it can be changed.

MerylStreep

Fleurpepper
RAAC is not dodgy concrete
There have been several programs on Radio explaining the problem. The problem was, water ingress due to poor construction and from then on, poor maintenance.

www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001q6hs

Yes, the roofing materials probably needing inspecting and replacing after a specified number of years.
Then weren't.

We had a chalet bungalow years ago and had the flat roof on the dormers checked and, if necessary, replaced after 10 years.

Fleurpepper
RAAC is not dodgy concrete
There have been several programs on Radio explaining the problem. The problem was, water ingress due to poor construction and from then on, poor maintenance.

www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001q6hs

I might agree that taxation doesn't always come before spending. It may come before, during or after. It is too simple to say it always follows. As we know, what is learned in school (your A-level example) often has to be unlearned and widened when learning progresses to a more complex level.

However, why does this mean that Joseann's argument is irrelevant? The way people view tax is exactly why the argument IS relevant. MMT's deficit-financed fiscal policy has not replaced monetary policy in any country, as far as I am aware. So, to suggest an argument based on a loose knowledge of how we use monetary policy is "irrelevant" is, at the very least, unhelpful.

The very oversimplification that comes with MMT seems to be what makes many economists cringe.

Actually DAR, there is a consensus amongst economists that spending precedes taxation. The disagreement is about whether taxation should be adjusted to take spending into account or whether the spending can be funded in some other way. Any A level textbook explains that taxation itself doesn't fund spending in an economy with its own currency.

I was not questioning anyone's intelligence.

Maisie said [As] taxation doesn't fund spending, but arises from spending[.]

There is no consensus among economists generally that this is a fact. There is little, if any, agreement among leading economists that it is. We also see very little proof that were it to be true, it would greatly affect the running of the economy.

This makes the conclusion that this is not a relevant argument, an ideological fallacy. Obviously Maisie is entitled to believe what she does about taxation. Those of us waiting for more proof may turn-out to be the "flat earthers" of our day. But until that proof arrives, I will go on commenting, when Maisie uses MMT as an excuse to tell someone their economic view is irrelevant.

I'm not an economist!

Apologies Callistemon.

DaisyAnneReturns

Callistemon21

No, she is not a new poster.

Not addressed to you Joseann so you intelligence was never in danger of insult

Was that was me? 😂

I think it's extremely rude to insult the intelligence of other posters. They may have knowledge and expertise in areas in which you know nothing.

No Callistemon, not unless you are also Joseann. What a strange question.

No, not a strange question as I also questioned the link between taxation and spending.

Callistemon21

No, she is not a new poster.

Not addressed to you Joseann so you intelligence was never in danger of insult

Was that was me? 😂

I think it's extremely rude to insult the intelligence of other posters. They may have knowledge and expertise in areas in which you know nothing.

No Callistemon, not unless you are also Joseann. What a strange question.

MaizieD

DaisyAnneReturns

Surprised by a previous post. Does anyone know; is Joseann new?

I assumed it was a variation on the name of a well known poster. People do name change from time to time for various reasons.

Indeed. Perhaps she also killed her computer

The best way to learn is by asking questions.

No, she is not a new poster.

Not addressed to you Joseann so you intelligence was never in danger of insult

Was that was me? 😂

I think it's extremely rude to insult the intelligence of other posters. They may have knowledge and expertise in areas in which you know nothing.

DaisyAnneReturns

Surprised by a previous post. Does anyone know; is Joseann new?

I assumed it was a variation on the name of a well known poster. People do name change from time to time for various reasons.