|
Post by Pretty Little Boother on Sept 23, 2019 16:22:00 GMT
The world isn't fair; it's as simple as that. And it never will be. There will always be people wealthier than others. People better looking than others. People more talented than others. People more caring than others. People healthier than others. I think you need to adjust to that or you are going to lead a very frustrated and unsatisfactory life. (if i may be so bold!) It never will be perfect or completely fair. So why bother fighting racism? Or pay gaps between genders? Why not stick with the Feudal system? because it'll never be Utopia so why bother trying to fix anything? Not meaning to open another can of worms, but the gender pay gap is demonstratably false, and has been repeatedly debunked as pure mythology by every single serious economist who has looked at it. It's a pure comparison between mean average male and female earnings that ignores myriad other factors. There is an "earnings gap" but that is most certainly not the same as a "pay gap", and stems from different choices made by average male and female members of the wider workforce.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Sept 23, 2019 16:32:53 GMT
Supposing taking part education was voluntary? Unrealistic perhaps. But those who don't want to be there, disrupting things for those who do, no need be. And then perhaps the " authorities" would have to come up with something relevant for the less academic ....and I am not talking solely about woodwork/ metalwork cookery and childcare. I was once a community education officer in ( a very left wing) Derbyshire LEA school. The philosophy was that " learning was lifelong" and that school premises should/ facilities should be open to the community. One initiative was that adults could join sixth form classes . One teacher said that it had a great effect on the 16-18 year olds. One woman of about 50 had said to two or three young girls who had been slightly disruptive on a btec or gnvq, can't remember, " Listen duck, I need to come back here to do my exams because I messed up first time. Don't spoil it for me." Good role model.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2019 16:46:03 GMT
It never will be perfect or completely fair. So why bother fighting racism? Or pay gaps between genders? Why not stick with the Feudal system? because it'll never be Utopia so why bother trying to fix anything? My teacher from when I was 10 to 12 years old admired China communism and we were told everyone in society should have the exact same salary, and wear the exact same type of clothes. We weren't allowed to join any sport events, running, tennis, football with our class. Reason? Everyone weren't equally good at it. She was extreme. Are you extreme? nope, not that extreme.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2019 16:48:21 GMT
No it isn't. But give me one good reason why a child who's parents have more money deserves to get the opportunity over one who's parents don't? 'In 2018 the proportion of private-school students achieving A*s and As at A-level was 48%, compared with a national average of 26%; while for GCSEs, in terms of achieving an A or grade seven or above, the respective figures were 63% and 23%. At both stages, GCSE and A-level, the gap is invariably huge.' The majority of the highest achieving students are from private schools. The vast majority of private school children are from richer backgrounds. That is nothing to do with rich kids being smarter, it's to do with privilege and luck, and that is wrong in a society that preaches 'opportunity for all'. A levels isn't what I said , the facts are the majority and in most cases it's 65 / 70% of university students were from state schools . The top 3 or 4 unis is 60% ish . In the bottom third it's 80% or more Okay, so what you're saying is that 30-35% of students in university are from private schools, despite only 6.5% of pupils in the UK being in private schools? That proves my point that going to private school gets you better life prospects.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2019 16:50:27 GMT
Just because we'll never reach perfection doesn't mean we shouldn't affect the things we can change to make the world more fair. Sounds like you are a fan of eugenics. Does it? how the fuck have you managed to wangle eugenics out of that sentence? I'm on about not giving the rich privileged access to better education just because they're rich. It's really not unrealistic, and it makes things slightly more fair than before.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2019 16:50:50 GMT
It never will be perfect or completely fair. So why bother fighting racism? Or pay gaps between genders? Why not stick with the Feudal system? because it'll never be Utopia so why bother trying to fix anything? Not meaning to open another can of worms, but the gender pay gap is demonstratably false, and has been repeatedly debunked as pure mythology buy every single serious economist who has looked at it. It's a pure comparison between mean average male and female earnings that ignores myriad other factors. There is an "earnings gap" but that is most certainly not the same as a "pay gap", and stems from different choices made by average male and female members of the wider workforce. Okay
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Sept 23, 2019 16:56:28 GMT
A levels isn't what I said , the facts are the majority and in most cases it's 65 / 70% of university students were from state schools . The top 3 or 4 unis is 60% ish . In the bottom third it's 80% or more Okay, so what you're saying is that 30-35% of students in university are from private schools, despite only 6.5% of pupils in the UK being in private schools? That proves my point that going to private school gets you better life prospects. Of course it does I've never argued that it didn't . That's why I support people's right to choose . Your problem is you can't get beyond the politics
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2019 16:58:32 GMT
Okay, so what you're saying is that 30-35% of students in university are from private schools, despite only 6.5% of pupils in the UK being in private schools? That proves my point that going to private school gets you better life prospects. Of course it does I've never argued that it didn't . That's why I support people's right to choose . Your problem is you can't get beyond the politics Right to choose is fine, but it isn't a right for all, it's one the right for the privileged. No politics involved with that.
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Sept 23, 2019 16:58:36 GMT
Sounds like you are a fan of eugenics. Does it? how the fuck have you managed to wangle eugenics out of that sentence? I'm on about not giving the rich privileged access to better education just because they're rich. It's really not unrealistic, and it makes things slightly more fair than before. Is your dad rich then , I'm certainly not , a lot of people I know made the same choice aren't rich either
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Sept 23, 2019 17:00:21 GMT
Of course it does I've never argued that it didn't . That's why I support people's right to choose . Your problem is you can't get beyond the politics Right to choose is fine, but it isn't a right for all, it's one the right for the privileged. No politics involved with that. How can you say the right to choose is fine then supporting closing down the countries finest schools
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2019 17:06:46 GMT
Does it? how the fuck have you managed to wangle eugenics out of that sentence? I'm on about not giving the rich privileged access to better education just because they're rich. It's really not unrealistic, and it makes things slightly more fair than before. Is your dad rich then , I'm certainly not , a lot of people I know made the same choice aren't rich either No, I'm one of very very few students that managed to get a scholarship. I'm not saying all people there are rich, but the rich*er* are allowed the choice, the poor aren't. Certainly neither you nor my dad are comparatively deprived either.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2019 17:09:15 GMT
Right to choose is fine, but it isn't a right for all, it's one the right for the privileged. No politics involved with that. How can you say the right to choose is fine then supporting closing down the countries finest schools Because it isn't a right. A right is something everyone is entitled to do. Yet a significant portion of people in this country are not entitled to send their kids to these schools because they cannot afford it. There is no right to choose unless you are lucky enough to have parents with enough money, or even luckier and manage to scrape one of very very few places available to scholarships. Which even then, are based on exams at an age where your aptitude in no way expresses whether you will succeed in life.
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Sept 23, 2019 17:21:22 GMT
Is your dad rich then , I'm certainly not , a lot of people I know made the same choice aren't rich either No, I'm one of very very few students that managed to get a scholarship. I'm not saying all people there are rich, but the rich*er* are allowed the choice, the poor aren't. Certainly neither you nor my dad are comparatively deprived either. No I'm not deprived , I left school at 15 and started my apprenticeship . How basic is that I've had a great well paid career . My start was typical of the time but we didn't bitch or complain that other people were reading law at oxford we had a work ethic we asked for nothing from the state we had our parents setting an example with love and stability showing us how to function with good advice and moral compass. Fast forward 50 years and what do young people experience today what example do they follow who gives them the time and trouble they need , I'm sure lots of kids have a decent parents but I see lots of parents who spend a thousand £ on phones and other expensive habits with no thought to the kids future
|
|
|
Post by cerebralstokie on Sept 23, 2019 17:22:51 GMT
Just for comparison, I taught for a year in an American High School. There were two in the town (a "city" about the size of Macclesfield).The only other High School in the town was a small Catholic school run by the church. State schools are non denominational and no religious assemblies were held. The main assemblies were "pep assemblies" before Football or Basketball Games. The schools were very well resourced (better than the school I had been teaching in). Many of the teachers were dedicated and strove hard to help their students. They were well paid (much better than I was) and were funded entirely out of local taxes. School funding had to be voted on when local elections were held and people were prepared to pay what was necessary to ensure that their kids got a good education. It was a model which worked for the community and there was no need to pay for private education. Education policies are state matters and salaries are set at state level so standards very from state to state and there are "sink" schools in old run down area just as there are here. Just an aside, there was a suggestion that the students should have more input into the curriculum and one teacher remarked that, if this happened, she would have to give up as she did not feel qualified to teach about automobiles and sex!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2019 17:24:10 GMT
No, I'm one of very very few students that managed to get a scholarship. I'm not saying all people there are rich, but the rich*er* are allowed the choice, the poor aren't. Certainly neither you nor my dad are comparatively deprived either. No I'm not deprived , I left school at 15 and started my apprenticeship . How basic is that I've had a great well paid career . My start was typical of the time but we didn't bitch or complain that other people were reading law at oxford we had a work ethic we asked for nothing from the state we had our parents setting an example with love and stability showing us how to function with good advice and moral compass. Fast forward 50 years and what do young people experience today what example do they follow who gives them the time and trouble they need , I'm sure lots of kids have a decent parents but I see lots of parents who spend a thousand £ phones and other expensive habits with no thought to the kids future Yes, well done to your generation. So a child should therefore be deprived of the chance at a far better education because his parents are a bit less bothered? Besides, I am very much certain the main thing stopping most parents sending their child to private school is not that they waste the money elsewhere, but that they simply can't afford. Had I not been lucky and got a scholarship and a bursary, my parents wouldn't have been able to afford, despite their 'hard work', and they are by no means deprived.
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Sept 23, 2019 17:24:49 GMT
How can you say the right to choose is fine then supporting closing down the countries finest schools Because it isn't a right. A right is something everyone is entitled to do. Yet a significant portion of people in this country are not entitled to send their kids to these schools because they cannot afford it. There is no right to choose unless you are lucky enough to have parents with enough money, or even luckier and manage to scrape one of very very few places available to scholarships. Which even then, are based on exams at an age where your aptitude in no way expresses whether you will succeed in life. You are describing the harsh facts of life , there will always be more money for people who are smart and who work hard
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2019 17:29:21 GMT
Because it isn't a right. A right is something everyone is entitled to do. Yet a significant portion of people in this country are not entitled to send their kids to these schools because they cannot afford it. There is no right to choose unless you are lucky enough to have parents with enough money, or even luckier and manage to scrape one of very very few places available to scholarships. Which even then, are based on exams at an age where your aptitude in no way expresses whether you will succeed in life. You are describing the harsh facts of life , there will always be more money for people who are smart and who work hard But why is it such a naive or stupid thing to try and make it less harsh? Why is it wrong to try and make life easier for those less fortunate? And I never worked hard for anything I got. I was 11 when I got into private school, I was just good at exams.
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Sept 23, 2019 17:33:16 GMT
No I'm not deprived , I left school at 15 and started my apprenticeship . How basic is that I've had a great well paid career . My start was typical of the time but we didn't bitch or complain that other people were reading law at oxford we had a work ethic we asked for nothing from the state we had our parents setting an example with love and stability showing us how to function with good advice and moral compass. Fast forward 50 years and what do young people experience today what example do they follow who gives them the time and trouble they need , I'm sure lots of kids have a decent parents but I see lots of parents who spend a thousand £ phones and other expensive habits with no thought to the kids future Yes, well done to your generation. So a child should therefore be deprived of the chance at a far better education because his parents are a bit less bothered? Besides, I am very much certain the main thing stopping most parents sending their child to private school is not that they waste the money elsewhere, but that they simply can't afford. Had I not been lucky and got a scholarship and a bursary, my parents wouldn't have been able to afford, despite their 'hard work', and they are by no means deprived. Some parents are not bothered at all , this alone almost guarantees their kids will struggle and give up regardless of where they go to school
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Sept 23, 2019 17:37:32 GMT
You are describing the harsh facts of life , there will always be more money for people who are smart and who work hard But why is it such a naive or stupid thing to try and make it less harsh? Why is it wrong to try and make life easier for those less fortunate? And I never worked hard for anything I got. I was 11 when I got into private school, I was just good at exams. Because your parents made it happen despite your lazy feckless father , I'm all for supporting the less fortunate in society just don't penalize the rest in the name of equality. The two issues are separate and unrelated
|
|
|
Post by Pretty Little Boother on Sept 23, 2019 18:18:30 GMT
I don't think anybody is proposing not helping the less fortunate in society, but there is no virtue in voting for a government that will hold people hostage under threat of violence to extort money from them, whilst smashing up the better institutions.
You'd be better trying to convince people to accept social responsibility on a voluntary basis and to contribute money etc to the lest fortunate through conscience, rather than twisting their arms behind their backs and jamming a finger up their arses.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2019 18:50:28 GMT
Yes. It is wrong for a child's life to be decided (and it is a huge factor on life) by whether or not their parents could afford to send them to a private school. I no more deserved the chance than any other person on Earth. I'm advocating for an equal sector, with proper funding for state schools. That's nothing to do with my view on private schools though, which is purely based on morals. Kids lucky enough to be born richer should not get more opportunities. The overwhelming majority of kids that go on to further education are educated in public secondary schools , the reason some kids don't have good educations is not because off private schools No but the £1.5 billion pounds per annum that could be raised by absoloshing the charitable status and introducing VAT on fees could pay for 50,000 teachers each year to help raise the standards across education as a whole so that's not completely true.....
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Sept 23, 2019 19:03:34 GMT
The overwhelming majority of kids that go on to further education are educated in public secondary schools , the reason some kids don't have good educations is not because off private schools No but the £1.5 billion pounds per annum that could be raised by absoloshing the charitable status and introducing VAT on fees could pay for 50,000 teachers each year to help raise the standards across education as a whole so that's not completely true..... I would welcome the additional investment in state schools , let's just say the parents of children in private education have paid for state education and don't take it up . If all the kids in private schools suddenly wanted a place in state school it would cripple the system . £1.5 billion is 1 1/2 months payment to Brussels 😉 . It's a relatively small sum in the context of total school funding
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2019 19:07:56 GMT
Right to choose is fine, but it isn't a right for all, it's one the right for the privileged. No politics involved with that. How can you say the right to choose is fine then supporting closing down the countries finest schools They're not being closed down though are they? (Genuinely haven't looked at the detail of the proposal) If it follows the Finnish model, it's the same schools, same teachers, same bricks and mortar but the parents don't pay the government pays. The main difference being that it must admit it's pupils on the same basis as the corresponding municipal schools.......
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2019 19:09:52 GMT
No but the £1.5 billion pounds per annum that could be raised by absoloshing the charitable status and introducing VAT on fees could pay for 50,000 teachers each year to help raise the standards across education as a whole so that's not completely true..... I would welcome the additional investment in state schools , let's just say the parents of children in private education have paid for state education and don't take it up . If all the kids in private schools suddenly wanted a place in state school it would cripple the system . £1.5 billion is 1 1/2 months payment to Brussels 😉 . It's a relatively small sum in the context of total school funding In the grand scheme of things harry of course yes, but would still pay for a 10% increase in teachers year on year, or more modern schools to reduce class sizes, or better sporting facilities to help with the obesity crisis etc etc.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2019 19:13:35 GMT
But why is it such a naive or stupid thing to try and make it less harsh? Why is it wrong to try and make life easier for those less fortunate? And I never worked hard for anything I got. I was 11 when I got into private school, I was just good at exams. Because your parents made it happen despite your lazy feckless father , I'm all for supporting the less fortunate in society just don't penalize the rest in the name of equality. The two issues are separate and unrelated Why do I deserve it? Not my parents, why do I? I did nothing for it at all, I was just lucky. That shouldn't be the basis with which we dole out the best education. The current system penalises everyone who's parents cannot afford to send them to private school.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2019 19:14:57 GMT
I don't think anybody is proposing not helping the less fortunate in society, but there is no virtue in voting for a government that will hold people hostage under threat of violence to extort money from them, whilst smashing up the better institutions. You'd be better trying to convince people to accept social responsibility on a voluntary basis and to contribute money etc to the lest fortunate through conscience, rather than twisting their arms behind their backs and jamming a finger up their arses. Why is the Finnish model so successful then, and their education system the envy of the world, genuine question? Yes the economies are different but it's all scalable in principal. There is no hang up about class in some of these progressive, forward thinking countries, and there's certainly no weird hang up with the "elite ruling classes" like we seem to have here in the UK. If you want to truly do something about inequality in society you have to be radical in your thinking......
|
|
|
Post by basingstokie on Sept 23, 2019 19:59:09 GMT
It never will be perfect or completely fair. So why bother fighting racism? Or pay gaps between genders? Why not stick with the Feudal system? because it'll never be Utopia so why bother trying to fix anything? Not meaning to open another can of worms, but the gender pay gap is demonstratably false, and has been repeatedly debunked as pure mythology by every single serious economist who has looked at it. It's a pure comparison between mean average male and female earnings that ignores myriad other factors. There is an "earnings gap" but that is most certainly not the same as a "pay gap", and stems from different choices made by average male and female members of the wider workforce. It's easy being a bloke to agree and claim it is false that there is a gender pay gap. However, if you are a business owner (therefore generally want to make money) and have a choice of employing a woman for 10% less than an equally qualified, capable, hard working man, ie 2 identical candidates, then why would you employ the man?
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Sept 23, 2019 20:48:37 GMT
Is your dad rich then , I'm certainly not , a lot of people I know made the same choice aren't rich either No, I'm one of very very few students that managed to get a scholarship. I'm not saying all people there are rich, but the rich*er* are allowed the choice, the poor aren't. Certainly neither you nor my dad are comparatively deprived either. He would be if he paid his tax
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Sept 23, 2019 21:27:51 GMT
I don't think anybody is proposing not helping the less fortunate in society, but there is no virtue in voting for a government that will hold people hostage under threat of violence to extort money from them, whilst smashing up the better institutions. You'd be better trying to convince people to accept social responsibility on a voluntary basis and to contribute money etc to the lest fortunate through conscience, rather than twisting their arms behind their backs and jamming a finger up their arses. Why is the Finnish model so successful then, and their education system the envy of the world, genuine question? Yes the economies are different but it's all scalable in principal. There is no hang up about class in some of these progressive, forward thinking countries, and there's certainly no weird hang up with the "elite ruling classes" like we seem to have here in the UK. If you want to truly do something about inequality in society you have to be radical in your thinking...... There ain’t no utopia though. Finland, sadly, has one of the highest suicide rates in the world (well in the upper quartile) The sad ole UK is in the third quartile.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Sept 23, 2019 21:29:37 GMT
Sounds like you are a fan of eugenics. Does it? how the fuck have you managed to wangle eugenics out of that sentence? I'm on about not giving the rich privileged access to better education just because they're rich. It's really not unrealistic, and it makes things slightly more fair than before. Simple. Raising standards and fairness is one of the arguments of eugenecists.
|
|