The UK is "deeply elitist" do you agree?

[beorhthelm]

It is outrageous and unfair, that 7% of the population for no reason other than their parents' money should weasel their way into positions of power like this; it is outrageous and unfair that any child's prospects in life should be so heavily influenced by how much dosh their parents have. It doesn't have to be like that, as other countries (especially those in Scandinavia) show us.

What's so pathetic about Milburn's report and those which precede it, is that he fails to draw the logical conclusion -- the only way that this will ever stop is if we just grasped the nettle and abolished the private schools. They are a massive blight on our society.

missed this, its the heart of whats wrong with the argument. they dont "weasel their way into positions of power", they still have to pass levels of exams and scrutiny that is applied to all. (in business they might, but not in the areas discussed) your conclusion is flawed because not all those that attend privates schools go on to such positions.

 

[perseus]

It's almost as if they've found a connection between a man's career and the quality of his education.

Hard hitting journalism.

Not in the wild west of Wales: http://attractions.walesdirectory.co.uk/Public_Schools.htm

They still speak the old Celtic language.

 

[lawros left foot]

the best educated go on to be the "elite", who'd have thought. its not "social engineering" its the natural order. do you want to deliberately elevate less educated people to judges, generals, senior civil servants?

No, what you want is the most intelligent in these careers, and due to the public school system in this country, we, as a nation don't give our most intelligent children the best education,we allow the parents wealth buy it.

 

[Blue3]

Totally elitist just look at those who are in power when was the last time we had a king or queen from a council estate background

 

[Doc Lynam]

Anyone who claims the system is fair is plain wrong. Private schools provide a higher standard of educations than public schools and so the private school educated go on to perform jobs with higher pay and power than the public school educated. You want the best people in the best jobs, yet the best education is given to kids whose parents are rich not to the kids with highest potential.
Why should a highly intelligent child from a poor background, or just plain average background, be given a worse education than a kid with a much lower intelligence from a rich background!?

It is elitist, and it is astounding that anyone can try to claim otherwise! The trouble is the people with the power to change the system are they very people who benefit from keeping the system as it is.

Thats pretty much it in a nut shell.

 

[beorhthelm]

Why should a highly intelligent child from a poor background, or just plain average background, be given a worse education than a kid with a much lower intelligence from a rich background!?

well thats another issue, the quality of the state system. the trouble here is those with a particular outlook decided to remove the option of high quality education from those from poor background, under the well meant but tragically flawed notion we should educate everyone to the same standard.

 

[H block]

Interesting interview with Tony Little the headmaster of Eton on radio 4 yesterday. Worth a listen if you can.

 

[drew]

it is what i meant, and it is implied. background doesn't matter if you have the education, diversity is a tarty concept of people who think that it addresses everything but it doesn't. lets be clear, there are places for it - police or magistrates spring to mind - but it doesn't solve any perceive problem here. turn it around, do we want to have quotas, 10% of High Court judges to have no formal law training, 15% of civil service to have no degree or live? or 5% come from socio-demographic D, at the expense of better educated and skilled personnel get passed over for the top roles.

do we want to enforce diversity by lowering standard? there are those that do actually say yes to this (ignoring that standards somehow are lowered by such an approach), but i disagree entirely.

Well I'll accept that's what you meant but don't agree that is how the post came across. However, maybe the problem is we have different definitions of elite. To me, it is not just people in top jobs, it is people who have got there with the benefit of the old boy network. Not everyone is there because of who they know but there is a perception that there are plenty. Yes i accept they all have to pass the relevant exams but if you have two equal candidates with the same qualifications but one has a father who went to the same public school as the person doing the hiring then they have a very good advantage. I do however agree with you that quotas are not the way forward unless candidates have equal qualifications for the job.

It is a legacy of the old class system but whilst it isn't currently perfect, I would suggest that it is better than it used to be.

 

[lawros left foot]

The question is, how educated do the powers that be want the average Joe to be? The more educated people become, the higher their expectations of better employment, salaries, housing,and general well being. Keep the proles relatively uneducated, you remove dissatisfaction in the state of the country, to a large extent, and the people put up with their lot,because they can't see an alternative

 

[Goldstone1976]

Keep the proles relatively uneducated,

So, please explain how the % of the population going to university has increased from <10% to ~50% in one generation if the "elites"' master plan is to keep the "proles" uneducated.

 

[drew]

So, please explain how the % of the population going to university has increased from <10% to ~50% in one generation if the "elites"' master plan is to keep the "proles" uneducated.

Maybe because going to uni is better than being on the dole!

 

[lawros left foot]

So, please explain how the % of the population going to university has increased from <10% to ~50% in one generation if the "elites"' master plan is to keep the "proles" uneducated.

I have 3 kids, who have all got a levels at a decent grade, and in proper subjects. I have 3o levels and left school at 16, in knowledge generally, History, Geography, English, and some Science, I am more knowledgeable. My kids would agree with this, because state school children are only taught the national syllabus, where as when I was at school, we had a basic knowledge on a wide range of subjects, with each teacher passing on their own lessons. Young people can get to Uni to easily now, and can study non subjects like media studies, party planning, and real estats. It appears now, that any student, no matter how intellectually challenged, can find some uni to let them study some mickey mouse subject,and the Unis get the tuition fees, the student gets three years with as little as three hours lectures a week, and the Government gets to say that 50% of students go to University, everyone's a winner

 

[Tarpon]

No, what you want is the most intelligent in these careers, and due to the public school system in this country, we, as a nation don't give our most intelligent children the best education,we allow the parents wealth buy it.

Yep. As Dennis Skinner said:

George Osbourne educated beyond his intelligence. David Cameron appointed beyond his competence.

Or something

 

[LargeHadronZugzwang]

Many privileged citizens in this country are inculcated with the belief they are superior. Several need educating. They require lessons in the ability to hold a conversation with ordinary people.

It is also the case that quite a few are living in a parallel universe that has totally different values. The historical perspective that they derive from Public schools is really quite shocking. In their history lessons do they discuss; the Chartists, Peterloo riots, Tolpuddle martyrs et al? Highly doubtful if this is done objectively: in fact it is obvious that what they are taught is a concoction of Empire glory shite.

In recent times we have had a PM that has advocated 'humanitarian intervention'.....what sort of oxymoron Orwellian garbage is that? We have also had a highly educated Education Secretary that has put forward the idea that Jane Austin should be studied instead, and the likes of Grapes of Wrath ought to be chucked out. Well, I'm begging Mr Darcy's pardon, but we should not automatically assume that they have a divine right to control all the resources, what we should think, as well as making us believe we should all be handing over the majority of the wealth like ragged trousered philanthropists.

We need an overhaul and an interest in proper history, not a superficial pack of lies. A cultural change is needed. Intelligence and education is not a vanity project based on the few acquiring ever increasing amounts of money.

 

[Dandyman]

As a first step remove the con trick of treating private schools as charities. They are businesses and should be taxed as such.

 

[looney]

William went to St Andrews, Harry didn't go to university.

But a thicko like Harry was deamed officer material though. Which goes to prove this is just a thread for middle class champaigne socialists. the kind where you debate why your wife should have a right to a well payed job as well rather than the right to work down a sewer.

Scarcity creates value and always, wether its degrees for top jobs or bottom ones.

 

[lawros left foot]

But a thicko like Harry was deamed officer material though. Which goes to prove this is just a thread for middle class champaigne socialists. the kind where you debate why your wife should have a right to a well payed job as well rather than the right to work down a sewer.

Scarcity creates value and always, wether its degrees for top jobs or bottom ones.

Nope, read it three times now, i don't understand a word

 

[User removed 4]

I repeat: don't ban private schools. Make state schools so good that paying for a child's education is a waste of money.

And if it means raising the top rate of tax to pay for it, then some of the people who had to pay extra would get a trade-off in that they wouldn't have to find all those school fees, and would have the rosy glow of knowing that they'd be helping everyone else out into the bargain.

It used to be like that , they were called grammar schools.

 

[RexCathedra]

I repeat: don't ban private schools. Make state schools so good that paying for a child's education is a waste of money.

"Therefore shall ye lay up these my words in your heart and in your soul, and bind them for a sign upon your hand, that they may be as frontlets between your eyes."

 

[User removed 4]

As a first step remove the con trick of treating private schools as charities. They are businesses and should be taxed as such.

So when was the last time a private school paid a dividend ? That's what businesses do. Yes let's make it unviable for a lot of these schools to operate and force more kids to use the state system that their parents are already paying for but not using , let's add even more kids to the register without any extra money to pay for them, typical flawed left wing politics of envy.