This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
jeeagles 23 Sep 19 8.23pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Yep precisely. We can talk about the inherent class divide and the problems that existed in the private schools of yesteryear.....but lets look at the products who came out of those places a hundred years ago. In WW1 those same products were in the trenches and blew their whistles and were first out into no man's land with the ordinary Joe behind him. When push came to shove they actually where, 'in it together'. What have the products of the last fifty years been? With exceptions they haven't been worth a light. Edited by Stirlingsays (23 Sep 2019 6.25pm) As W12 and Cryst point make clear, the reality of private schools are that most parents make loads of sacrifices to send there kids there. Social mobility may also be a contributory factor in why people don't notice the difference between state and privately educated people anymore. Also, it hasn't been pointed out, that getting into a good state school is a post code lottery. Parents will pay £10's or £100's of thousands more to get a house in a good catchment area. There's been stories I know of where parents have bought 1 bedroom second homes in good catchment areas and rented them out. It doesn't necessarily make for a fairer system. Two more things for tonight that haven't been pointed out. Paying parents and private schools make the kids work really really hard. They want there monies worth. It's the kids hard work that gets the good results, and they take that hard working attitude into the working world with them (only for envious Corbynista socialist to tell the child that they didn't get good results due to their hard work, but due to their privilege - I put this in bold as it's so easy to overlook). State schools are all too often too soft on the children, which doesn't help them in the long run (exceptions exist). There's certainly no parents who just regard school as a day care center for teenagers and allow their kids to distract the education of others. Finally, the difference between modest career success and becoming part of the elite is based on the ability to undertake internships which give you the exposure to build networks and reputations within those circles. Private education certainly helps, but family connections are more important and the ability to fund and house your child for 5 years after university to do this. That's a system that will never change, and probably become more of a closed shop if the choice of elite education is taken away from the masses.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 23 Sep 19 8.42pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by jeeagles
As W12 and Cryst point make clear, the reality of private schools are that most parents make loads of sacrifices to send there kids there. Social mobility may also be a contributory factor in why people don't notice the difference between state and privately educated people anymore. Also, it hasn't been pointed out, that getting into a good state school is a post code lottery. Parents will pay £10's or £100's of thousands more to get a house in a good catchment area. There's been stories I know of where parents have bought 1 bedroom second homes in good catchment areas and rented them out. It doesn't necessarily make for a fairer system. Two more things for tonight that haven't been pointed out. Paying parents and private schools make the kids work really really hard. They want there monies worth. It's the kids hard work that gets the good results, and they take that hard working attitude into the working world with them (only for envious Corbynista socialist to tell the child that they didn't get good results due to their hard work, but due to their privilege - I put this in bold as it's so easy to overlook). State schools are all too often too soft on the children, which doesn't help them in the long run (exceptions exist). There's certainly no parents who just regard school as a day care center for teenagers and allow their kids to distract the education of others. Finally, the difference between modest career success and becoming part of the elite is based on the ability to undertake internships which give you the exposure to build networks and reputations within those circles. Private education certainly helps, but family connections are more important and the ability to fund and house your child for 5 years after university to do this. That's a system that will never change, and probably become more of a closed shop if the choice of elite education is taken away from the masses. For one, social mobility hasn't improved in this country for living memory....in fact when did it actually improve? Grammar schools were meant to help the bright working class..... What you seem to be talking about is the social mobility of the lower middle class into the middle class proper. Your points in your post kind of beg the question.....so what? How is that of any relevance to Joe Bloggs the plumber? Why should he be contributing towards the aspirations of the lower middle class? For the average Joe the net affect is that the best teachers and students get taken out of the system....it lowers his experience to heighten theirs. Like I said in my criticisms....If you look at what the middle and higher classes have done for this country in the last fifty years....I'm not seeing anything other than feathering their own nests and in many cases working against their own country's interests.....Why should average Joe be helping them as part of the tax system. None of what you wrote really addresses any of my criticisms. Edited by Stirlingsays (23 Sep 2019 8.45pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
serial thriller The Promised Land 23 Sep 19 8.51pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by jeeagles
Are you talking about an asset based system where everyone based all their wealth on owning property and were so confident on house prices going up and up banks were offering 120% LTV self certificating interest only buy to let mortgages? That was new Labour's biggest f*** up, but no one wanted to piss of the baby boomers generation. And that was the supposedly 'sensible' leadership the media are clamouring after. Thank God we've got rid of them.
If punk ever happened I'd be preaching the law, instead of listenin to Lydon lecture BBC4 |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Jimenez SELHURSTPARKCHESTER,DA BRONX 23 Sep 19 9.11pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
For one, social mobility hasn't improved in this country for living memory....in fact when did it actually improve? Grammar schools were meant to help the bright working class..... What you seem to be talking about is the social mobility of the lower middle class into the middle class proper. Your points in your post kind of beg the question.....so what? How is that of any relevance to Joe Bloggs the plumber? Why should he be contributing towards the aspirations of the lower middle class? For the average Joe the net affect is that the best teachers and students get taken out of the system....it lowers his experience to heighten theirs. Like I said in my criticisms....If you look at what the middle and higher classes have done for this country in the last fifty years....I'm not seeing anything other than feathering their own nests and in many cases working against their own country's interests.....Why should average Joe be helping them as part of the tax system. None of what you wrote really addresses any of my criticisms. Edited by Stirlingsays (23 Sep 2019 8.45pm) A lot of those Middle & higher classes are the working classes of the 70s & 80s why shouldn't we feather our own nests?
Pro USA & Israel |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 23 Sep 19 9.18pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
In fairness some of my school colleagues went on to be armed robbers, drug dealers and gangsters so leader of a political party isn’t a totally bad option. Fair point but as those leaders have a responsibility to try to make sure that the education of your old colleagues was better, whose failure is it? In actual fact I can see both sides of the argument. The motivation to ensure that your kids get the best possible start in life is strong, understandable and ultimately a driving force which is of benefit to us all. Those who sacrifice their own life style to achieve this deserve great credit. Making sure that the privileged cannot buy their way into positions of influence via elite schools, networks and favours so that only the most meritorious are chosen to hold high office also seems a desirable path to tread. Of course those elite schools also attract the children of the elite from around the world who will themselves often go on to be leaders in their own countries. Forming friendships at school with such people can be of enormous future benefit so we do need to ensure our own future leaders are there to make those friendships. Can we actually do that? I'm torn.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 23 Sep 19 9.24pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Jimenez
A lot of those Middle & higher classes are the working classes of the 70s & 80s why shouldn't we feather our own nests? Not a lot.....and as for why you shouldn't feather your own nests?.....Because in doing so you've made a mess of the pavement. Like I said....the best justifications for the private system died on battlefields eighty years ago and especially a hundred years ago. Like I said, (with exceptions) what's been the point of these silver spooners since the baby boomers? I'm not seeing a strong argument for why the average Joe should be contributing that's all. Edited by Stirlingsays (23 Sep 2019 9.27pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
cryrst The garden of England 23 Sep 19 9.26pm | |
---|---|
The uk is a fairly rich country which does have low middle and upper classes.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Rudi Hedman Caterham 23 Sep 19 9.55pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by jeeagles
I was only thinking about office jobs, maybe I've lost touch a bit. The amount of time people waste in offices is pretty awful, most people can normally squeeze there full week into a shorter week if they really go for it, then will have more spare time to procrastinate. With lower income jobs, there's too many factors that come into play to list. Hopefully it will help to improve living conditions by driving up wages, but who knows, it could easily back fire, and one of the biggest problems Corbyn's Labour party has is political nativity. For office jobs that aren’t call centre based where every minute is important it can work. In any job where they call their day a ‘shift’ it’s a disaster waiting to happen. Any job you’re on your feet, forget it. Not many minutes are wasted. A very inflationary proposal.
COYP |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Rudi Hedman Caterham 23 Sep 19 10.19pm | |
---|---|
Funny how labour leaders want another Brexit vote in a referendum but don’t want another more accurate party conference vote on it with cards rather than hands in the air counted. Only labour. Only Corbyn.
COYP |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Teddy Eagle 23 Sep 19 10.22pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Fair point but as those leaders have a responsibility to try to make sure that the education of your old colleagues was better, whose failure is it? In actual fact I can see both sides of the argument. The motivation to ensure that your kids get the best possible start in life is strong, understandable and ultimately a driving force which is of benefit to us all. Those who sacrifice their own life style to achieve this deserve great credit. Making sure that the privileged cannot buy their way into positions of influence via elite schools, networks and favours so that only the most meritorious are chosen to hold high office also seems a desirable path to tread. Of course those elite schools also attract the children of the elite from around the world who will themselves often go on to be leaders in their own countries. Forming friendships at school with such people can be of enormous future benefit so we do need to ensure our own future leaders are there to make those friendships. Can we actually do that? I'm torn. I’m not sure it was a failure of an educational nature really. A lot of them were thugs who had no inclination to learn anything. There wasn’t the same emphasis on exams then; it was possible to get a job with hardly any qualifications.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
johnno42000 23 Sep 19 10.56pm | |
---|---|
I want him to go. I'd also like to see a system where 1 child from a poor background gets into the private schools for every fee paying child.
'Lies to the masses as are like fly's to mollasses...they want more and more and more' |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
.TUX. 23 Sep 19 11.09pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Jimenez
A lot of those Middle & higher classes are the working classes of the 70s & 80s why shouldn't we feather our own nests? 1800's possibly.
Buy Litecoin. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.