Britain's Ruling Elite

johnnytapia said:
Relatively recently I was asked to contribute to a short item NewsRound were doing. They came to my school and interviewed the children. It centred around “aspiration” and the news that Cameron and Gove had said not enough children have high aspirations and that the state sector didn’t imbue enough of the “we can get to Oxbridge” mentality as seen in the upper echelons. I was subsequently interviewed and asked for my opinion. To paraphrase what I said then:

The absolute vast majority of teachers in state schools want the very best for the children they teach. We teach them that, with the right application, hard work and ambition, they can be successful. We strive to get the very best out of them. But, and this is the crucial part - when these children finish High School and begin to apply to colleges and then to Universities, they suddenly come up against the brick wall known as the harsh world of reality. It’s a reality where money buys you success. One begets the other. Breaking that cycle can be done - but it’s an absolutely mind-bogglingly low % of working class children that get into these places. And it’s nothing to do with state aspiration or lack thereof.

Children at private schools don’t receive better teaching. Utter nonsense. What they do have are classrooms of enthused, attentive, well-fed, well looked after fellow pupils. Almost none of them will have special needs -educational or otherwise. Almost all will come from a household with two, employed parents. These same parents in most cases will know the system - they’ll know where to get tutors, they’ll know where and how to get in touch with the people at the universities.

It’s abhorrent that we have so few state pupils going on to Russell Group Universities - but the blame lies squarely, not at the feet of the state sector - we teach EVERYONE, regardless of ability, language, social status (this is something the private sector never does, never would and never could ) but at the feet of governments of all hues. Virtually all new MPs tread the same weary, well known politcial path - PPE at Oxbridge, intern for a while and hey presto, you have your seat. Gone are the days of miners, doctors, lawyers, businessmen coming into the system. And so, the political world sees that change would damage the status quo - trkeys and Christmas and all that.

Don’t fall for the myth that were it not for a bit more of “stiff upper lip” in state schooled children, things would change. State school kids, especially those from the poorest backgrounds, cope with things well-heeeled kids would flinch within seconds at. Seconds.

It all comes down to one thing - money. It buys you success. There are examples of people bucking that trend, but, by and large, money talks, bullshit walks.

A good post JT - not entirely accurate but not far off to be fair.
There are plenty of one parent families at independent schools - trust me on that one.
Hardly any (if any) special need kids on that one you are 100% correct.
The Russell Group of universities is far from elite. I really do mean far from elite (the Ivy League is Oxford, Cambridge, UCL, Durham etc) I know kids who have recently got in Russell Group uni's to study law with A-level results of B,B & C - hardly the brightest and the best by any stretch of the imagination.
Money does not buy you success - far from it. I admit what it does buy is opportunity. However the work and the graft still has to be put in by the students to get the A* results and grasp that opportunity. Most independent schools do not use Excel as an exam board they use others that mark more stringently so it is not a direct or fair comparison when measuring results head to head.

You bang on on with how respective governments have used education as a political football at the direct expense of the education of the children and that is criminal without a doubt.
 
Ducado said:
Out of my group of friends from School (I am at a get together this weekend)

Chartered Surveyor (Me)

Quite a High ranking Policeman

A very high earning commercial manager

A Barrister

From the same school there are two millionaires (that I know of)

All state educated

Not the ruling elite granted, but there seems to be a people saying state educated kids can't or don't make it in life, when in fact many of us do

I'm not re-reading 30 pages but has anybody actually said that state educated people can't make it in life? Whatever your definition of that might be.

Plenty have said your chances in life statistically, drastically increase or decrease depending on what school you get sent to and I don't see how anybody could disagree with that.

None of which, as you say, has anything to do with the ruling elite anyway.
 
Re: Britains Ruling Elite

Stoned Rose said:
SWP's back said:
Stoned Rose said:
Because it's bollocks and holding nothing back.

That's not an answer bud. It's a glorified repeat of what you said originally.

Can you elaborate?

The only thing that stops anyone succeeding is lack of talent

Extremely narrow minded perspective.

What about those who are talented but don't succeed due to lack of motivation? stresses within their lives? going off the straight an narrow? parents who don't give a fuck? etc etc.

Also, what about those who succeed despite lack of talent? much like some of the 'ruling elite' types the thread alludes to.

Talent is part of the jigsaw but only one of the pieces.
Talent and application then. That seems to cover off your points.

There's no doubt some make it to the top without an abundance of either but I never look to try and bring others down to my perceived level rather than strive to better my own lot with a helping of both.

Anyone with talent and application will make something of themselves in the Uk (so long as they have health I guess).

Talent, application, health definitely.

Then there's also 'opportunity' and 'connections' as very important parts of the jigsaw.

Many people with the first 3 don't have much going for them by way of the 2nd two.

That can definitely limit their chances to utilise the first 3 properly.

It's a complex melting pot of factors.
Regarding the latter two, I went to a bog standard primary and passed an exam to get into a decent school. We didn't have any family connections and my dad was bankrupted when I was 7.
 
Gelsons Dad said:
nijinsky's fetlocks said:


Plenty of deeply unpopular folk end up there to pay less tax.
Phil Collins spent the last years of his life there.
'Nuff said.

I pay more tax now than at anytime in the past ;-)

RIP Phil.
I ermm, don't.

But 45p in the pound is a ridiculously high tax rate when compared with zero.
 
SWP's back said:
Gelsons Dad said:
nijinsky's fetlocks said:
Plenty of deeply unpopular folk end up there to pay less tax.
Phil Collins spent the last years of his life there.
'Nuff said.

I pay more tax now than at anytime in the past ;-)

RIP Phil.
I ermm, don't.

But 45p in the pound is a ridiculously high tax rate when compared with zero.

You've done it now you evil tax dodger you!
 
BigJimLittleJim said:
Gelsons Dad said:
SWP's back said:
I ermm, don't.

But 45p in the pound is a ridiculously high tax rate when compared with zero.

You've done it now you evil tax dodger you!


Whaaaat? is SWP's back a fucking student now??
Another reason to detest the **** :-)
 
johnnytapia said:
Virtually all new MPs tread the same weary, well known politcial path - PPE at Oxbridge, intern for a while and hey presto, you have your seat.
And there's the other issue you have. Unpaid internships are much easier to do when you have parents who are willing to cover your living costs while you do it. Another example of something that creates an unlevel playing field. None of these things are insurmountable, but when you put them all together, it's not surprising to find a disproportionate of people from a wealthy backgrounds in the top jobs. However, when large numbers of the government ministers (and those in the cabinet in particular) are not just from a private school background, but all from a particular school, there's something far worse going on. Government positions are the last thing that should be based on nepotism, and yet they obviously are.
 
tidyman said:
I'm not re-reading 30 pages but has anybody actually said that state educated people can't make it in life? Whatever your definition of that might be.
No, of course not. But it's like those threads about university education where someone always brings up Richard Branson or Bill Gates as "evidence" that a university degree is unnecessary. It's basically the equivalent of saying "I know a rich black man, therefore racism doesn't exist."
 
I'm With Stupid said:
johnnytapia said:
Virtually all new MPs tread the same weary, well known politcial path - PPE at Oxbridge, intern for a while and hey presto, you have your seat.
And there's the other issue you have. Unpaid internships are much easier to do when you have parents who are willing to cover your living costs while you do it. Another example of something that creates an unlevel playing field. None of these things are insurmountable, but when you put them all together, it's not surprising to find a disproportionate of people from a wealthy backgrounds in the top jobs. However, when large numbers of the government ministers (and those in the cabinet in particular) are not just from a private school background, but all from a particular school, there's something far worse going on. Government positions are the last thing that should be based on nepotism, and yet they obviously are.

Are there still elections in England? Do you vote? Do you perpetuate or innovate?
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.