So it's class war then...

[heppers75]

Fittster said:

turbobloke said:

those at the lower end long-term when they are in all likelihood going to continue making bad decisions

Poor people are poor because they make bad decisions? There bad decision was largely being born into poor families.

So someones status in life is simply predetermined by the family they are born in to? Really... oh sod, I had better get my ass down the pit then and back to a terrace house in Mansfield!

[Fittster]

rovermorris999 said:

You don't make poor people richer by making rich people poorer.

But how did the rich become rich? Did the have the same opportunities to gather wealth as those who have ended up poor did?

[markiii]

yes but hen multiply by each generation having a leg up as a result of the previous generations success

Poor people just aren't rich yet, all it takes is enough time and enough effort, its not a magic bullet

[Fittster]

heppers75 said:

Fittster said:

turbobloke said:

those at the lower end long-term when they are in all likelihood going to continue making bad decisions

Poor people are poor because they make bad decisions? There bad decision was largely being born into poor families.

So someones status in life is simply predetermined by the family they are born in to? Really... oh sod, I had better get my ass down the pit then and back to a terrace house in Mansfield!

As I said earlier:

"The evidence shows there's very little social mobility (I'm sure I'm about to get the usual anecdotal evidence about some who was brought up in such poverty their diet consisted solely of rat piss until the age of 18 and is now CEO of the world)"

some facts

or something completely different

Edited by Fittster on Thursday 27th November 18:31

[heppers75]

Fittster said:

heppers75 said:

Fittster said:

turbobloke said:

those at the lower end long-term when they are in all likelihood going to continue making bad decisions

Poor people are poor because they make bad decisions? There bad decision was largely being born into poor families.

So someones status in life is simply predetermined by the family they are born in to? Really... oh sod, I had better get my ass down the pit then and back to a terrace house in Mansfield!

As I said earlier:

"The evidence shows there's very little social mobility (I'm sure I'm about to get the usual anecdotal evidence about some who was brought up in such poverty their diet consisted solely of rat piss until the age of 18 and is now CEO of the world)"

Actually made me smile there...

From my own experience, some of which I have shared on here - one of the biggest barriers to social mobility is actually the reaction you get from those who remain from where you have moved. The opportunities to move are all around really and access to better value private education because of the likes of charity status etc is one of those methods.

[turbobloke]

FredClogs said:

You could have just said a rising tide floats all ships. Mr Bloke, let's not get into the habit of peculiar verbosity and endless rhetorical questions to attempt to illustrate a well understood point. Shall we? (That was rhetorical and ironic).

Really?! I thought it was a plug for the alternative approach of ignoring difficult questions that challenge redistributivist dogma.

As for verbosity there were relatively few lines of text in my post. Not guilty.

heppers75 said:

Fittster said:

turbobloke said:

those at the lower end long-term when they are in all likelihood going to continue making bad decisions

Poor people are poor because they make bad decisions? There bad decision was largely being born into poor families.

So someones status in life is simply predetermined by the family they are born in to? Really... oh sod, I had better get my ass down the pit then and back to a terrace house in Mansfield!

Exactly. By the same token I'm working as a lumper on the docks somewhere, as per half my gap year, though in reality I'm not. Given that many people emerge from very challenging circumstances to achieve great things, or at the very least improve their lot considerably, the critical factor simply cannot be birth-related - however inconvenient this may be in exploding traditional excuses for underachievement.

[crankedup]

Fittster said:

crankedup said:

Yes but you must understand that the positions that are awarded to the 'tie wearers' are not the average jobs, these are positions of serious National and International power. It is the conveyor belt system of best schooling/best further education, best of everything that's been purchased. Look at the Government front bench for examples. This selectivity is pure old fashioned class that was prevalent in Victorian times and now seems to be raising its ugly head again.
Indeed I do accept that your uni degrees and the like are important, but then tell me which Uni will carry the most weight when it comes to a dog fight for that job. It will always be the 'most respected' and almost certainly most expensive degree which will carry the holder to success, regardless the other candidate is equally well qualified for the post.

Do you believe its possible to have equality of opportunity? Personally I think there's sod all chance, those with money will use it to give their children an advantage.

No I do not believe it is possible, I agree with you entirely. Although simply to play with words it is also true to say that equal opportunity applies to all, but within strict sector confines imo.

[turbobloke]

heppers75 said:

Fittster said:

heppers75 said:

Fittster said:

turbobloke said:

those at the lower end long-term when they are in all likelihood going to continue making bad decisions

Poor people are poor because they make bad decisions? There bad decision was largely being born into poor families.

So someones status in life is simply predetermined by the family they are born in to? Really... oh sod, I had better get my ass down the pit then and back to a terrace house in Mansfield!

As I said earlier:

"The evidence shows there's very little social mobility (I'm sure I'm about to get the usual anecdotal evidence about some who was brought up in such poverty their diet consisted solely of rat piss until the age of 18 and is now CEO of the world)"

Actually made me smile there...

[markiii]

heppers75 said:

From my own experience, some of which I have shared on here - one of the biggest barriers to social mobility is actually the reaction you get from those who remain from where you have moved.

so true I know many people who will use the excuse of their friends, locality, background as an excuse for not improving their lot.

And its true a lot of time people react badly to those doing better than them as it reminds them its mostly their own apathy keeping them where they are.

My view, choose what you want, not what you peer group approve of, and if friends can't cope with your success they aren't really friends.

But if they choose to take the easy option and not better their lot, then do the rest of us the courtesy of not constantly moaning about it :-)

[heppers75]

markiii said:

heppers75 said:

From my own experience, some of which I have shared on here - one of the biggest barriers to social mobility is actually the reaction you get from those who remain from where you have moved.

so true I know many people who will use the excuse of their friends, locality, background as an excuse for not improving their lot.

And its true a lot of time people react badly to those doing better than them as it reminds them its mostly their own apathy keeping them where they are.

My view, choose what you want, not what you peer group approve of, and if friends can't cope with your success they aren't really friends.

But if they choose to take the easy option and not better their lot, then do the rest of us the courtesy of not constantly moaning about it :-)

Sadly yes, someone else achieving any sort of "social mobility" is the one thing slap bang guaranteed to bring out the very worst in the many that do not. I could give you dozens and dozens of examples from mine and Mrs H's last 10-15 years together from the simply sad and funny to the downright nasty and vindictive and ranging from close family members to once close friends and just simply acquaintances.

[crankedup]

wsurfa said:

crankedup said:

NomduJour said:

crankedup said:

Maybe, but TBH I had in mind those very exclusive types from Harrow, Eton and the like, should have used different language in my post to make it clear. But it all starts from the first day at the 'right' school

That just might have been the case in the odd broker's office pre-Big Bang, but do you seriously think Goldmans, Magic Circle law firms and the like operate like that? It's a worldwide market. Delusional.

Your use of the word delusional is misplaced, it also displays your ignorance within this area that we are debating. You seem to be very confined and insulated in your thought patterns to be perfectly honest.

Just interested Crankedup - what is your direct experience of how leading banks, law firms, multinationals etc recruit people? It seems from your statements that you must have detailed, possibly internal, experience. Would be interesting to hear it, obviously you don't need to name the actual employers that you were part of the graduate assessment/selection process for.

Thanks

Do you agree or disagree with what I have said in my posts? My reason for asking this is so that I am satisfied that I am not going to waste my time and effort in engaging.
The other point I need to ask of you is as to whether you have read the analysis within the links kindly made available by another interested poster in this thread.

[crankedup]

Soov535 said:

rovermorris999 said:

NomduJour said:

So give tax relief to those who don't use the state system.

Edited by NomduJour on Thursday 27th November 17:16

Absolutely. They're paying twice. Same with medical insurance.

But you see, it's not FAIR that we try to do better for our families. That word again - FAIR.

They want us all on bicycles with little red books and green uniforms. All the same, at the lowest common denominator.

Absolutely wrong! you should be designated a tricycle, with pedals on the front wheel

[crankedup]

Fittster said:

heppers75 said:

Fittster said:

turbobloke said:

those at the lower end long-term when they are in all likelihood going to continue making bad decisions

Poor people are poor because they make bad decisions? There bad decision was largely being born into poor families.

So someones status in life is simply predetermined by the family they are born in to? Really... oh sod, I had better get my ass down the pit then and back to a terrace house in Mansfield!

As I said earlier:

"The evidence shows there's very little social mobility (I'm sure I'm about to get the usual anecdotal evidence about some who was brought up in such poverty their diet consisted solely of rat piss until the age of 18 and is now CEO of the world)"

some facts

or something completely different

Edited by Fittster on Thursday 27th November 18:31

I fear you are wasting your time by responding, 'the intellectuals' are resorting to child like posts now. Still making up my mind if its simply a case of their heads in sand or they genuinely misguided and poorly tutored in terms of Social and business awareness. This being the case some allowance needs to be made perhaps.

[heppers75]

crankedup said:

Fittster said:

heppers75 said:

Fittster said:

turbobloke said:

those at the lower end long-term when they are in all likelihood going to continue making bad decisions

Poor people are poor because they make bad decisions? There bad decision was largely being born into poor families.

So someones status in life is simply predetermined by the family they are born in to? Really... oh sod, I had better get my ass down the pit then and back to a terrace house in Mansfield!

As I said earlier:

"The evidence shows there's very little social mobility (I'm sure I'm about to get the usual anecdotal evidence about some who was brought up in such poverty their diet consisted solely of rat piss until the age of 18 and is now CEO of the world)"

some facts

or something completely different

Edited by Fittster on Thursday 27th November 18:31

I fear you are wasting your time by responding, 'the intellectuals' are resorting to child like posts now. Still making up my mind if its simply a case of their heads in sand or they genuinely misguided and poorly tutored in terms of Social and business awareness. This being the case some allowance needs to be made perhaps.

Yes we are all so utterly inadequate in the mere shadow of the great left champion that is the almighty crankedup... Who has yet once more demonstrated on this thread as he has on many many others that as soon as he is faced with answering a direct question refuses to interact, simply states his word is law and then starts to cherry pick his way to insults!

With replies like this: -

crankedup said:

Do you agree or disagree with what I have said in my posts? My reason for asking this is so that I am satisfied that I am not going to waste my time and effort in engaging.
The other point I need to ask of you is as to whether you have read the analysis within the links kindly made available by another interested poster in this thread.

As for childlike posts... I will just leave this one here for you...

crankedup said:

Absolutely wrong! you should be designated a tricycle, with pedals on the front wheel

[heppers75]

Fittster said:

heppers75 said:

Fittster said:

turbobloke said:

those at the lower end long-term when they are in all likelihood going to continue making bad decisions

Poor people are poor because they make bad decisions? There bad decision was largely being born into poor families.

So someones status in life is simply predetermined by the family they are born in to? Really... oh sod, I had better get my ass down the pit then and back to a terrace house in Mansfield!

As I said earlier:

"The evidence shows there's very little social mobility (I'm sure I'm about to get the usual anecdotal evidence about some who was brought up in such poverty their diet consisted solely of rat piss until the age of 18 and is now CEO of the world)"

some facts

or something completely different

Edited by Fittster on Thursday 27th November 18:31

Ignoring the cranky pillock...

I do not disagree that Social Mobility is on the decline at all.

I think we should be looking for ways to increase it and including education. I include on that educating the more adult population that it is not a bad thing, as it seems to me there are for too many that see it as a bad thing and react badly to it.

I am somewhat baffled though as to why if you agree that social mobility is on the decline and that access to private education (for good or bad reasons) increases social mobility - why would you seek to support possible legislation that would make it harder to attain?

Also cheers for the Python, not seen that for an age..

[RYH64E]

Fittster said:

Poor people are poor because they make bad decisions? There bad decision was largely being born into poor families.

Not poor in terms of cash, poor in terms of parenting. It's perfectly possible for a motivated student with supportive parents to excel, infortunately the vast majority of poor parents place little or no value on education. The worst performing demographic currently is white, working class boys, equally poor children from other (immigrant) demographics do much better because their parents (plural) push and encourage them.

[ATG]

I had the misfortune to hear Waddock Hunt on the Today Programme and it was as close to a proper tub-thumping class war delivery as he could muster ... e.g. quite shamelessly goading some mild mannered head master who was trying to take an even handed approach to the subject.

And yet ...

What was the 'logic' behind idiot boy's argument? It was a presumption that private schools are inherently better than state schools and that their teachers should be sent like missionaries to help the poor feeble minded lot who work in the state sector.

What a dick.

There is a sensible debate to be had about treating private schools as charities. Hunt clearly has no interest in engaging with it. And it would be a minor side show alongside a real policy on education. He himself suggested the tax break was worth about £120m. That is bugger all. The idea that lending a few teachers and some facilties from a bit part player in education to the mainstream is going to have any real impact on outcomes is obviously daft.

So he tries a bit of class war, but actually displays his own elitist attitude. Very well done.

With this degree of ineptitude the Conservatives still have a chance at the next general election. Long may Labour keep shooting themselves in the foot.

[anonymous-user]

Pretty much sums it up

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/secondaryeduc...

[heppers75]

fblm said:

Pretty much sums it up

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/secondaryeduc...

It really is pretty much spot on - also a very sad indictment of the state of the once formidable and world renowned UK education system.

[turbobloke]

heppers75 said:

fblm said:

Pretty much sums it up

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/secondaryeduc...

It really is pretty much spot on - also a very sad indictment of the state of the once formidable and world renowned UK education system.

Unis were already extending science and maths degrees by an extra year to allow for the woeful state of new arrivals, now an Oxbridge college is sending students to a local sixth-form college for an enforced gap year. FFS. Presumably it's not alone. It's time the Labour Party took its tanks off college lawns and let the admissions process do its job. If this shows that Bliar's "education education education" promise led to an education system turning out grossly under-equipped young adults with "grade inflation grade inflation grade inflation" hiding the decline, so be it. It's just another Blair failure to add to the list after all. Gove wanted to raise standards to help state educated kids and boy was he loved for it.

Only the independent sector as a whole is world-renowned these days so naturally Labour wants to dismantle it brick by brick after they and their children benefited from it.