Them and us - why posh Tories who claim to care about social mobility haven't got a clue

Moondog

Instead of bleating about what public schools are doing wrong, it might make sense to look at what they are doing right, hence people making huge sacrifices to send their kids to them.

See below

When all schools have the same facilities and pupil to teacher ratios and the same cramming to get into the best universities as the top private schools then it will be an even playing field

Or is it that only the well off are entitled to the things described above. As for huge sacrifices I am sure those on minimum wage could not afford to send their kids to a private school no matter how hard they tried.

Claig

I think the cleverest in the land should go to university. I'm not a fan of bigwigs in ivory towers playing at social engineering with people's lives.

If their was anything near a level playing field in education then I would agree however there is not. Would the "cleverest" be the same people if the playing filed was level, I think not.

Small class sizes, cramming for entrance exams etc gives an unfair advantage to the well off and dont forget the old school tie as well.

You two just want to entrench privilege.

'8% of pupils are educated at private schools so no more than 8% should be at the top universities otherwise it is just bought privilege'

Instead of bleating about what public schools are doing wrong, it might make sense to look at what they are doing right, hence people making huge sacrifices to send thier kids to them.

I think the cleverest in the land should go to university. I'm not a fan of bigwigs in ivory towers playing at social engineering with people's lives.

Bloody good job why should money buy advantage in regard to universities.

When all schools have the same facilities and pupil to teacher ratios and the same cramming to get into the best universities as the top private schools then it will be an even playing field until then the state sector must have first pick as such.

8% of pupils are educated at private schools so no more than 8% should be at the top universities otherwise it is just bought privilege

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1363007/MPs-anger-ill-conceived-social-engineering-experiments-deny-university-places-middle-class-pupils.html

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1218273/Universities-accused-crude-social-engineering-ignoring-bright-students-good-schools.html

'seriously, are you two taking the piss?'

Not unless teh social engineers were taking the piss

www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/7318961/Private-schools-condemn-social-engineering.html

Consrevataives hate change? yes that's right, Mrs T left the country exactly as she found it hmm.

(bitter laugh)

Yes she changed it all right, she destroyed a large part of our industry, presided over the highest ever unemployment, the highest child poverty for decades, destroyed whole communities, used the police as political shock troops. yes she certainley did change the country.

"More likely to have trouble getting into uni since he's been to public school"

"allsorts of barriers and hurdles"

seriously, are you two taking the piss

THere is nepotism in all areas of work. Like Ford in Dagenham in the seventies and eighties, where jobs were handed down. Or the mines. Or small family businesses.

I'm a Tory and eat out very seldom. My last meal out cost £18 including wine. Hardly profligate.

I am also not xenophobic, being the daughter of an immigrant, with a brother who is an immigrant in another country. I do, however, accept that the population of the south of England is now too large.

Dione,. re your panic stricken comment about the would be doctor, this makes me laugh
'What if he didn't pass, what if he didn't finish'

Er, and what. Are you saying that;s a good reason for us to cough up for his fuck up
I jacked in a uni course a long time ago but wnet bacvk aND second time round i paid for myself-as is only right. I've also just completed an MSc. Who piad? Me.

True, there will all sorts of barriers and hurdles he will have to jump.

More likely have trouble getting into uni since he's been to public school ...

Fantastic. From Eton, he'll probably go to Oxford, and then who knows, maybe Prime Minister. That's real social mobility.

My ds will go to Eton. His grandad cannot read or write more than his own name, and has not worked in 30 years.

Grammar school kids, my dh and I.

But if he is committed to meritocracy and is working towards it, it is irrelevant if he comes from a privileged background. Lord Longford came from a privilieged background and worked for the rights of people in jail. Princess Diana came from a privileged background and worked for poor people and sick people through her charities. It all comes down to their intent and their actions. I think Osborne cares for the good of the country, which is why he wants the talent of the country to flourish and is in favour of social mobility.

He doesn't go far enough, he won't reinstate grammar schools that allow poorer, bright children to get an education as good as the private school children, and he is in favour of the student fee policy, but so too were Labour.

I mentioned nothing of capability to be in office, I am disputing how on earth someone who is born into a wealthy family is "at the top of society" and understands more regarding meritocracy than the rest of us.

If he does his job well, then absolutly he should be in office.

What he shouldnt do is give us all lectures on meritocracy and social mobility.

But does that mean that anyone with inherited wealth is disqualified from office? Can't they still be clever and capable? Is Alan Johnson any more capable than George Osborne?

jackstarb not actually, absolutly not

The point with meritocracy is that you get where you are based on your own merit and ability, not class or mommy and daddy.

The four million in the bank (George Osbourne) is entirely inherited, never worked a day in his life for it and actually he could have an IQ of 30 and still get that cash.

how is that meritocratic

"A lot of people find it very offensive that MP's with 4 million in the bank are telling them about social mobility and meritocracy."

nullius Actually that statement is almost ironic. Are you saying those at the 'top' of our society know less about 'meritocracy' than those further down? And, shouldn't even care or do anything about social mobility for fear of upsetting the less affluent?

Yes, SWC some strange logic on this thread......

The point was not "all rich people are bad".

The point was dont be a hypocrite, and dont critisise people when you have never been in their position.

Alot of people find it very offensive that MP's with 4 million in the bank are telling them about social mobility and meritocracy.