Privately Educated People Are Responsible For Most Of The UK's Problems

a reply to: Kester

Well I see you have a problem with educated people that are able to afford private education, right?

Also you feel that the poor are getting the short end of the stick right?

Soo to fix the problem with equality for all meaning getting rid of private schools, the rich and what money can buy is only one solution, socialism, Right?

Got you, is always going to be those that rules and the ones that follow in any system of government.

So rather than feeling oppressed and left out, get out there and get yourself into a good school and pay for it, I am sure is loans available for higher education were you are at, right?

originally posted by: grainofsand
Saying that though it was a foolish choice of degree probably, so was mine to be fair "Applied Chemistry" I only did it to scratch an itch so to speak, never actually wanted to work solely in a clean-room laboratory so I didn't.
I just wanted to prove something to myself...oh, and party hard for 3 years.

You're in good company - Thatcher's first degree was in Chemistry before she retrained for the Bar. In both cases she worked hard and earned scholarships to fund her way. I know that many people refuse to like her but she set an excellent example in many ways - certainly one of the hardest working world leaders of recent times.

a reply to: EvillerBob

Agreed, and I note she went to grammar school as well.
Why all those councils in the UK abolished their grammar schools I really cannot understand. I just thank my lucky stars that I ran-away to be a homeless 16 year old in a region which did not abolish them. I dragged my sorry arse up to a comfortable life, and my own son is going to be richer than me in a few years because of the opportunities his hard work in grammar school gave him.

The shortage of places is the only aspect I struggle to accept, but even in a sinkhole estate comprehensive if the parental support is there then a student can aspire to greater things, its just harder.
As I said earlier, my childhood was a sinkhole estate comprehensive school, but I wanted to succeed so I did...through hard work...something many people seem to forget these days, you know, everyone is a victim and all that.

originally posted by: grainofsand

As I said earlier, my childhood was a sinkhole estate comprehensive school, but I wanted to succeed so I did...through hard work...something many people seem to forget these days, you know, everyone is a victim and all that.

Oh, so many of our society's problems stem from an obsession with passing the buck and placing the blame on some generic "others" ; everyone needs to blame someone else for their own failure to get off their backside and take responsibility for their own life. It's always because of "the man", or "the rich need a slave class", or "the elite don't want me to be educated" - and never "I couldn't be bothered to work at school", or "I was more interested in chasing girls than doing homework", or the painfully honest "I'm just not very intelligent".

I mean, just look at the thread title...

I find it quite interesting that you talk about being a plasterer in this thread, as my father uses plasterers in one of his favourite expressions: "If you can't skim a wall, you've got no business judging the work of a man who can".

a reply to: EvillerBob

I brought my son up to know that he can do whatever he wants in life because he has a fully working brain and body, just some paths will be easier for him than others and vice versa.

...I like your dad's line haha, and although I used to be a senior civil servant in a previous life, I prefer making something beautiful from something horrid with my trowel and hawk these days. I do all sorts to be fair, brick/blocklaying, studwalling, blah, but I love plastering because it's the final finish hiding everybody else's crap work lol.

...all the folk who have a working brain and body but whinge that they can't do anything in life need to consider how strong their MOP is. Motivation, organisation, and planning. MOP your life out first and then come bleating to me I say, perhaps I'll have some sympathy if they have actually put some effort into succeeding.
Too many lazy whingers in our society I reckon.

originally posted by: Kester
a reply to: Gothmog

It's a common story here that when you take it higher you find you're talking to the enemy.

I know a psychiatrist who, as a young mental health nurse, cared for one of serial killer Fred West's daughters. Several times the girl told the nurse what was happening. Forced prostitution, satanic abuse, murder. Several times the nurse told her superiors. She was told to ignore it. When she brought the matter up for the last time she was told she would be sacked if she mentioned it again. Now we all know the girl was telling the truth. This is how it usually is here in the UK. If there is an investigation the whistleblower is frequently made the victim of the investigation.

The thread title speaks for itself.

Nurse should have gone to the Police directly. Maybe even used a solid state voice recorder to collect the statements.

a reply to: stormcell

Late 70's recording technology was noisy and bulky unless you paid big bucks. Recording at work would be subject to strict controls. Cover-ups were easier then. Policing has improved since. Going to police has no guarantee of success now, much less then. Going to senior staff was correct, theoretically.

Last time I told the story to a collection of wise, elderly ladies they all agreed and said things like "usually the way".

We have this issue gaining attention now.

A 1993 Gloucestershire Constabulary report to the Crown Prosecution Service (WARNING: Some graphic sexual language) showed how the former Bishop of Gloucester and Stroud clergyman was backed by leading establishment figures, and police warned the Crown Prosecution Service of the 'devastating' effect a prosecution could have on the Church of England.

Read more: www.gloucestershireecho.co.uk...

Police aren't magic. They're just paid, trained, and have sworn an oath to do those duties that are incumbent upon all of us. Many of us, both police and the rest of the public, are supportive of the Peelian Principles.

The police at all times should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police are the only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the intent of the community welfare.

www.durham.police.uk...

Notice the link is from Durham Police, the best police on Planet Earth. www.abovetopsecret.com...

In my experience being told, 'you talked to the wrong person' is excuse number one. Though obviously in your case it's enviable lack of experience that causes you to say that. My experience began investigating a case involving GCHQ Bude staff, traditional human sacrifice, always made to look like an accident, and suspicions of cannibalism within the Bhagwan cult. Fun, fun, fun. Especially when they tell you you'll be the next sacrifice if you don't shut up.

Going to police resulted in what I can only call black magic sabotage. There were only the two of us there, myself and the head of the local police child protection team. An action occurred which threw the policeman completely off track. Take it or leave it, that's my experience of involving police in a satanic abuse investigation.

Ok, now show me where the majority of Publicly educated people in these positions of power differ from their privately educated counterparts.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

You don't get into 'power' unless you're corrupt, corruptible, able to be distracted or in on it from the start.

Take David Davis for example. Slum flat then council estate. Grammar school. TA SAS to pay for further education. The only British politician I've strongly supported due to his stand against 42 days detention, said to be a surefire way of radicalising homegrown terrorists. The military choice for PM. So what did they do to him? Set him the task of restoring public confidence in the banks. Ha ha. You'd be better employed emptying the ocean with a sieve. They couldn't break him so they distracted him.

originally posted by: TheTory
a reply to: Kester

Maybe private school offers a better education than the public schools, leading to a higher likelihood that one will achieve positions of power.

If they offer a better education, then it would make sense that public schools could copy their model but they don't.

I think the reason for this is that it's not a model that can be copied. In a private school the teachers can be much harder on you, atleast at the one I attended the grading scale was far harsher (90% was the cutoff for a D-). There's always the student motivation that beyond simply failing, you're also out of the school if you don't keep your grades up. Such motivation doesn't transfer to public schools. Last, private schools get some say over who attends so that the classrooms aren't full of people who shouldn't be there.

So in the end I think that while the teachers may be better (this is up for debate), it's the students themselves who have much more motivation in a private school, and the classrooms are better.

I realize this thread is about the UK rather than the US but it's somewhat applicable here too. I have no idea how to go about fixing this. It's not really about what or how they teach it. It's more about who else is in the classroom, and how motivated the people in those seats are.

a reply to: Aazadan

I agree with your observations, but there is a non-fee paying state option still in some parts of the UK which achieve better results than many private fee charging schools. It is called the grammar school system.

These schools are applied for aged 11 and prospective students sit exams and are interviewed before the school selects it's intake.
I'll be the first to admit that it's not the best system due to applications always far exceeding number of places so only the highest achievers are selected.

As a result though the school is full of students who are passionate about learning, disciplined and respectful because they worked so hard to get into the school of their choice.

I said earlier that two of my son's mates are now at Cambridge university and they are from minimum wage family backgrounds.

One of the worst things the Labour party ever did to poor families was close grammar schools in areas they controlled.
I just thank my lucky stars that I live in a mostly Conservative region of the UK and my son went to one of the highest performing schools in the UK, for free...a school which Labour would have abolished, denying him one of the best possible starts in life.

a reply to: grainofsand

You're moving me to tears.

a reply to: Aazadan

There are definitely those, like myself at that age, who should be in work instead of distracting the other students. Not exploitation, interesting work in keeping with their abilities and giving the opportunity for advancement.

originally posted by: Kester
a reply to: grainofsand

You're moving me to tears.

Haha, behave!
It's true though, the grammar system does help poor kids achieve their potential in a way that comprehensives do not.
My mates were gutted when their son's didn't get in after the 11+, I watched bright lads go downhill in the zoo that is the local comprehensive.
Labour ruined education for the majority with the comprehensive system.

a reply to: Kester
Agreed, and we used to have 'technical schools' where vocational trades could be pursued.
Even in my crappy comprehensive in Swansea where I studied in the 80's we had gardening, bricklaying, plumbing, and metalworking and lots more courses for those who couldn't get on in an academic setting. The only lessons then mandatory were maths and English.
It was a forward thinking comprehensive and those vocational courses kept otherwise disruptive students engaged.
The national curriculum killed all that, but I must add that was a stupid mistake by the then Conservative government.

originally posted by: Kester
a reply to: SprocketUK

I don't agree with standing armies and following orders. The potential for misuse is too great.

As we found in a previous thread this is the way to get responsible civilian firearms training and experience. www.shootingclubdirectory.com... I'd prefer to see every willing and patriotic individual capable of defending our land.

Good luck with that.
It's just a delusional pipe dream. A modern Professional Army, airforce and navy are so far beyond what a part time militia can achieve it's not even funny.

Your statement shows you haven't the faintest grasp of history.

a reply to: SprocketUK

True. We have to work from where we are.