SPAM random annoying things

[Scouse]

I don't see the benefit of dragging private education down to the levels of state education though.

Did you even read the post and think about the points I made?

Yes, on the face of it, abolishing a really good education system seems like a terribad idea. But when you look at the result of having a for-privilege education system and what happens to the rich kids that go through that system, what it means for all of us in terms of political, social and economic outcomes, and marry that to the fact that we should be (but aren't) shooting for that level of education for all, rather than just a privileged few, then it's obvious that private education simply entrenches inequality.

Inequality is more important an issue than the standard of education received by a small number of rich kids. If even you, a teacher, can't see the causal link between private education and entrenchment of inequality there's no hope.

(Do you teach at a private school btw? Got a couple of friends who do, and they fucking love not having to teach scum kids, even whilst they acknowledge it's not fair on those who are intelligent, but, not just held back, but utterly hamstrung by our woeful state education system.)

 

[MYstIC G]

I don't see the benefit of dragging private education down to the levels of state education though.

Even if you take away all the private schools there will still be some schools that are better than others, there will always be a top school.

I don't see the benefit of dismantling functional educational establishments instead of changing them to serve the wider community.

 

[Gwadien]

Inequality is more important an issue than the standard of education received by a small number of rich kids. If even you, a teacher, can't see the causal link between private education and entrenchment of inequality there's no hope.

Ofc I acknowledge the link between private education and inequality.

What I don't understand is how is it beneficial to state education by putting more pressure on it by putting more kids in it?

Obviously private education attracts the best teachers, but the problem is, with teacher retention already being pretty low, I'd imagine that lots of those teachers would just rather find work in another industry, rather than returning to state education.

As I said earlier, the problem with education is that its so focused on schools results rather than the kids, which means that lots of money is spent on lots of different glorified spreadsheets in order to present their data in as many ways as possible in order to please Ofsted, and teachers spend most of their time filling out said glorified spreadsheets.

Education needs reform first, more money second.

Also, as G said, there will be little change if you scrapped private anyway, lots of state schools already perform at private levels and go to the best universities etc, the only difference you'll see is the privileged people trying their hardest to circumvent selection in order to get their kids into the best schools in the area.

 

[Scouse]

What I don't understand is how is it beneficial to state education by putting more pressure on it by putting more kids in it?

Private schools are subsidised through tax breaks. Those resources - and, as you acknowledge, better teachers - should be available to all, not just a highly subsidised few.

Rich parents could still afford private tutuors to add to the myriad advantages their children have. However, the very existence of the two-tier education system entrenches inequality.

If you're in any way serious about levelling a playing field, that's absolutely the first step.

You can reform state schools all you like - reform is the name of the status-quo game - but you have to structurally act in a different manner if you want different outcomes.

 

[Gwadien]

Private schools are subsidised through tax breaks. Those resources - and, as you acknowledge, better teachers - should be available to all, not just a highly subsidised few.

Rich parents could still afford private tutuors to add to the myriad advantages their children have. However, the very existence of the two-tier education system entrenches inequality.

If you're in any way serious about levelling a playing field, that's absolutely the first step.

You can reform state schools all you like - reform is the name of the status-quo game - but you have to structurally act in a different manner if you want different outcomes.

And private schools take pressure of state education.

All you're going to do is reduce the spending per pupil and therefore make state education even worse, and then have wealthy parents pay for more private tutors (but will still be cheaper than paying for a private school)

So nah, I disagree.

 

[Scouse]

And private schools take the pressure off fixing state education because those that matter are getting what they need anyway.

Fixed for ya.

 

[Gwadien]

Fixed for ya.

I just think you think it'll be an easy fix.

The problem will continue, especially under Academies, after working at a Catholic school, parents donate to the Church in order to secure places in schools (from nursery to 6th form).

I can just see there being a Church of the Elite with Academies of the Elite being setup where you get full tax payer funding + added presents from your congregation.

 

[Scouse]

I just think you think it'll be an easy fix.

The problem will continue, especially under Academies, after working at a Catholic school, parents donate to the Church in order to secure places in schools (from nursery to 6th form).

I can just see there being a Church of the Elite with Academies of the Elite being setup where you get full tax payer funding + added presents from your congregation.

I never thought any of this would be easy. Look how difficult it is to get consensus on an issue that's really really well understood.

Just because there are other (myriad) problems shouldn't mean we don't even bother to attempt to tackle the glaring ones. Including donation to catholic schools (in fact, I'd remove faith schools period).

 

[DaGaffer]

I agree that they're the poster-boy for egalitarian ideals but even Sweden is struggling with a rapidly worsening position on a number of metrics.

Eg: On Income Inequality (same is true for wealth inequality)

Spoiler

View attachment 40521

Since the market reforms of the 1980's that's pretty much the story the world over. The EU ties our hands on methods we'd use to combat the issues that have been created. But it's a died-in-the-wool capitalism club. A club based on a system that, whilst promising at first, has now shown to be wreaking economic, social and environmental havok at a rate that humans can barely comprehend.

If the EU was willing to undergo serious structural economic reform then absolutley it would make 100% sense to stay in, but the fact that it's not gives weight to the position that Corbyn stated this weekend - we could be better off outside the EU dependent on the deal we made. (Not that we will be).

Of course, that would be Britain only - and wouldn't structurally fix the global clusterfuck that capitalism is manufacturing in it's current form.

But arguments about all that aside - the fact is Sweden, the most equal of EU societies, is becoming more unequal.

Getting rid of public schools won't fix capitalism, it's as simple as that (and before you say it, no its not "a start"). Apart from anything else, in case you haven't noticed, the old school tie can easily be replaced by a tie from another country now. While Britain seems to determined to pull up drawbridges left, right and centre, the rest of the world, and more importantly the rest of the world's money, will simply spend elsewhere. There's a private school in Dublin (Nord Anglia) that's not only the most expensive school in Ireland (by a distance) but almost none of the kids who attend are actually Irish; they're the sons and daughters of foreign CEOs running foreign companies, and when they get relocated their kids will go to another version of the same school elsewhere, and carry on with their iBac. This is the reality now. Eton? Fuck that shit, all they do is churn out actors and politicians.

Labour are playing to the cheap seats and it's a waste of time.

 

[Embattle]

So funny you said it twice

 

[Scouse]

Labour are playing to the cheap seats and it's a waste of time.

It's certainly a point of view. Whilst I see where you're at - including the acknowledgement that Eton pumps out politicians (which is one of the primary issues) - I'm not sure I agree with all of it.

I'm not trying to pin you down on this - but what's the approach then? Because you say "reform capitalism" and you're met with "fuck no" and you say "reform schooling" and people say "fuck no", you say "need to do something about overconsumption" and people say "just you fucking try it sonny"... yadda yadda yadda.

Inequality contributes to an existential crisis for mankind IMO. It's tied up in the environment, social justice and a whole host of things.

Fuck no is why we've had brexit votes. Our poltiical system and corporate system is jammed to the rafters with rich people who went to the likes of Eton. That alone is one of the primary reasons that the poor don't really have a voice - they're dependent on the good will and charitable views of those who "represent" them in parliament - but those who represent them have no real knowledge - first hand experience - of the desparation and urgency of the issues and their plight gets treated less seriously.

Canning that basic inequality isn't going to solve the world's ills - but it'd definitely be a first step on starting to fix this countries' political and corporate makeup.

The days of doing fuck all about this should really be numbered. I suspect we'll do fuck all.

Selfishly - I've not got any kids, and I earn well (because that early-years education gave me a massive head start on the rest of my peers - the only people ahead of me in the organisation I'm currently in are pumping their kids right into private school (and have double-barrelled surnames a-plenty). I'd absolutely 100% give the advice to put your kids in private school if you can afford it to anyone who asks me (and I have)). So it's not an existential crisis for me, per se.

But the rest of you? If you want your kids to grow up in a better world you'd better start looking at this seriously rather than being happy that you're probably running ahead of the Joneses...

 

[Jupitus]

So funny you said it twice

Sorry - you had to be there

 

[DaGaffer]

So funny you said it twice

I was using a third-world telco system (London Docklands)

 

[Job]

The daughter went to private school.

Main advantage, she doesnt sound like the Scousers when she talks and seems to be able to just walk into jobs.
Most of my younger mates went to Merchant Taylors, mixed with their families contacts, they are all millionaires...one of them was on the board of Trend and made multi millions from his stock.
I dont see them now because our lives are too different, they have become totally status obsessed snobs and barely give me a nod when I see them.

Wheres my violin.

 

[Gwadien]

The daughter went to private school.

Main advantage, she doesnt sound like the Scousers when she talks and seems to be able to just walk into jobs.
Most of my younger mates went to Merchant Taylors, mixed with their families contacts, they are all millionaires...one of them was on the board of Trend and made multi millions from his stock.
I dont see them now because our lives are too different, they have become totally status obsessed snobs and barely give me a nod when I see them.

Wheres my violin.

Remember that 'boring white areas' thing you were moaning about.

This is what it was talking about

 

[Ormorof]

Almost no private schools in Finland, because state schools are as good or better, theres still some "good schools" but that tends to apply to specialized schools at high school level that focus on languages or music for example

Regardless of school everyone does same exams, no fractured exam boards no messing about

 

[Gwadien]

Almost no private schools in Finland, because state schools are as good or better, theres still some "good schools" but that tends to apply to specialized schools at high school level that focus on languages or music for example

Regardless of school everyone does same exams, no fractured exam boards no messing about

Yeah, there's another problem with us.

Our fastest growing exam board is privately owned because its the cheapest on paper.

Problem is that the exam board slightly changes all the specs every year meaning that you're forced to buy a new set of text books every year.

Its madness.

 

[DaGaffer]

Yeah, there's another problem with us.

Our fastest growing exam board is privately owned because its the cheapest on paper.

Problem is that the exam board slightly changes all the specs every year meaning that you're forced to buy a new set of text books every year.

Its madness.

Irish exam board is single, state-run, all schools, public and private, do the same exams*, and they pull exactly the same trick where you have to buy new books every year (worse, the kids have to write in them as well). I have to spend nearly 300 euros a year on books and my kids are seven and nine!

(*a couple of schools do the international baccalaureate instead, as I mentioned above).

 

[Scouse]

Its madness.

Nah, it's an eminently sensible way for the privately educated owner of the business to extract cash from the public sector, with the blessing of his eton-educated political mates who set the system up.

Them-and-us. But don't "wreck" a good education system. I mean, what would forcing rich kids to be in the same boat mean eh?

Maybe there wouldn't be the cynical profiteering at taxpayer expense - because they would, in effect, be fucking their own kids over, rather than just the plebs.

Or maybe not. Cause the costs would be absorbable to the rich, so..... :shrug:

 

[Gwadien]

Nah, it's an eminently sensible way for the privately educated owner of the business to extract cash from the public sector, with the blessing of his eton-educated political mates who set the system up.

Them-and-us. But don't "wreck" a good education system. I mean, what would forcing rich kids to be in the same boat mean eh?

Maybe there wouldn't be the cynical profiteering at taxpayer expense - because they would, in effect, be fucking their own kids over, rather than just the plebs.

Or maybe not. Cause the costs would be absorbable to the rich, so..... :shrug:

I'd argue that the cost of resources has a much bigger impact on accessibility of education compared to the role of private schools.

The poorest kids get their books for free, but if you're not entitled to them then you have to pay for them, when I was at school, we had ones that were up to 10 years old. Now you have to have brand new ones at like £30-40+ a pop.

 

[DaGaffer]

eXcel (the conference centre not the software). I've been to trade shows here across four different industries at this point, and there's something about this place that sucks the life out of all of them. It's a depressing hole.

 

[Embattle]

I remember going to earls court exhibition centre for a car show many years ago, I enjoyed it and hated it at the same time.

 

[Scouse]

Sometimes, the problem with humans is that we're just not violent enough.

 

[MYstIC G]

eXcel (the conference centre not the software). I've been to trade shows here across four different industries at this point, and there's something about this place that sucks the life out of all of them. It's a depressing hole.

It's because it's vast and there's nothing to do there

 

[DaGaffer]

It's because it's vast and there's nothing to do there

So is the NEC, but I've had some great experiences there. Lots of conference centres are barns but this one takes the biscuit. It definitely doesnt help that the staff are the most sour faced crew I've ever seen; I think one of the security guys getting in this morning was pleasant, everyone else had a stick up their arse.

 

[Embattle]

It's London

 

[Moriath]

Sometimes, the problem with humans is that we're just not violent enough.

Send the un in to keep peace on its boarders.

Tbh.

 

[Scouse]

Send the un in to keep peace on its boarders.

I meant, perhaps one of the hundreds of environmentalists that are getting murdered every year for protesting might take up a gun and trade his life for el presidente. Or a few corporate heads of companies with shocking environmental record.

It wouldn't rebalance the death much, but it'd certainly give some people food for thought.

 

[Gwadien]

I meant, perhaps one of the hundreds of environmentalists that are getting murdered every year for protesting might take up a gun and trade his life for el presidente. Or a few corporate heads of companies with shocking environmental record.

It wouldn't rebalance the death much, but it'd certainly give some people food for thought.

I'm with Job on this one tbh.

Realistically when money takes priority over everything, we don't have the right to tell them not to exploit their natural resources, since we use the internet to wave to them what we have and what they don't.

The only way that we (or America) can have any impact is by putting a stop to buying things that are created through exploitation of their natural resources.

That, or wait for the en mass conflict when the natives defend their territory with their spears and get their village massacred in response, that will probably cause some more outrage than trees.

 

[Scouse]

we don't have the right to tell them not to exploit their natural resources

I don't give a fuck whether we've got the "right". In absolute terms there's no such things as "rights".

What I do know is that, if they're intent on murdering the people that are trying to protect the environment - and their trashing of the environment is contributing to making a more dangerous world for all of humanity (not to mention the biodiversity loss that we now have a much better grasp of than we did historically) - then fuck them.

Fuck them with bullets in the face. Brazil and Indonesia alike.

And, frankly, corporates who continue to invest in companies that are complicit in these actions.