One of the benefits of success is to pass that advantage on to one's offspring. If I were very rich, I'd ensure that my kids had everything they might need, including a private education. I don't think we can criticise people for that attitude but clearly it does present a problem for our society where potential incompetents are in top jobs and a closed shop based on old school tie cronyism develops. It is up to institutions to make policy that discourage that sort of behavior because we can't deny people the fruits of their father's or even their great great great grandfathers labour.

I take it then that you are intolerant of the widely held views on these matters in the Muslim communities?

We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell]

Sounds reasonable. I'd say that the most important factor is protecting society at the end of the day.

I would too. I think I'd also like to spend some of that hypothetical wealth helping others, such as setting up scholarship grants for 'poor kids' to pay for university or private school.

Its very important that in 'implementing socialism' we do not remove the incentive to work. Kids shouldn't be prevented from the best education if they show the potential to benefit from it. But its important that we don't fall into the trap of thinking everyone is the same ability or interests. Just 'allowing everyone to go to university' isn't an answer, it should be focused on those who 'earn a place'. The real failure is that we don't offer suitable alternatives to a good career that don't require higher educational achievement.

For example, apprenticeships, work place programs etc. You shouldn't need to go to university to become a lawyer or solicitor, there should exist an equal level of intake based on legal apprenticeships (in fact most people don't realise these even exist anymore - And that as a school leaver you could become a solicitor quicker than if you went to college, university and post-grad training).

The reason these have become less popular, is of course companies and businesses don't want to pay for training and production of skilled employees, when the state and more recently the prospective employee can shoulder the burden.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

I am not having a go at Trump I am saying his actions fall within your description of the liberal left. Your charges are false as I have explained elsewhere in these threads. If there is a conspiracy in the establishment it is of public school t***s few of whom are liberals or Liberals

I'd agree with pretty much all of that.

I have no problem with someone who has the means choosing to pay £41,000 a year to send their child to Dulwich for example. The issue is, as you say, it becomes a closed shop. When people are turned away from interviews because they are up against someone who has 'Harrow' on their CV.

I think it's pretty disheartening when you look at Government and see a group of people who all went to school together are running the show.

Employee of the month is a good example of how someone can be both a winner and a loser at the same time.