Rishi Sunak went without Sky TV so his parents could send him to private school

[number10bus]

Honestly this has really annoyed me, apart from the fact it's such crap - he came from a family where his parents were a GP and a pharmacist, it's like he's literally thought of the most working class stereotype and applied that. He's so out of touch and I don't know why this one has annoyed me so much but it really has.

I'm not much older than our prime minister and we didn't have one either, or holidays and not much in the way of any luxury items and guess what my parents couldn't afford to send me to private school despite them working very hard too.

I know he has his own money. I just have no respect for the manner in which he “created” that wealth.

Tell that to Rishi Sunak! He's the one claiming otherwise!

My house didn't have a fridge or a telephone in it until I was 9 years old, nevermind a TV. Both my parents worked and they really struggled. Rishi lives on a different planet

Apparently Sky only had 3 channels back then and he was eight so would’ve been at boarding school.
As the twittersphere / Xsphere has pointed out, wealthy families didn’t have Sky as it was for the common folk.

@Carota

It is a race to the bottom in this country.
Well it has been in the last 14 years, that's for sure.

As we didn’t have own a television let alone have multi-channel going up.

@Truetoself "sold land back home etc"

So relatable....

It's so unfair of him to imply that the plebs could afford a private education if only they were parsimonious and prudent like his parents and didn't squander their money on lowbrow nonsense like Sky.

It was a career that started aged 21 at Goldman Sachs and saw him co-found a firm registered in the Cayman Islands.
But it is Mr Sunak's three years at hedge fund TCI straddling the 2008 financial crash that is now being revisited.
https://news.sky.com/story/what-did-rishi-sunak-do-before-he-entered-politics-13147625#:~:text=With%20RBS%20saddled%20with%20debt,expense%20of%20the%20British%20taxpayer%22.

I know the media really wants me to outraged at everything Rishi Sunak does or says recently, but I just don't care.

Wealth created legally by any means does not need or require anyone's respect. His parents were middle class/professionals. Many people are driven by the same thing - each generation aiming to support the other to maximal heights.

This is not to say he couldn't have answered the question better. But to lack respect for how he made his money is pointless. With supportive parents and going on to be a banker - what is there to respect or not respect?

Frankly we can all learn from his parents and other migrant parents with regards to how they learn a system, sacrifice and rise to the top. Same in the US

😢Poor Rishi, how very difficult that must have been for him. What a hardship, the poor little mite.

It's pathetic how out of touch the man is and how appalling his communication skills are in general. How has he got this far, I wonder? Hmmm.

Going without SkyTV would pay for private education? Hmm.

As he is a politician, I would say that the respectability of his past actions are somewhat relevant.

So you are right, in a sense that his wealth is not dependent on anyone else’s respect as long as he respected the law when created that wealth.

However, his political capital will very much be affected by the respect people have for his actions, both past and present.

Do you think he secretly has all the answers?

I mean, if you can send your DC to Winchester by giving up Sky imagine what you could do if you gave up Netflix as well? The NHS could be saved, no less.

Sky Tv was about £50 a month back in the day.

I'd love private school to cost £200 a year (he's one of three).

Quite.

I don't think the issue about whether or not he's out of touch is the funny thing here.

Its the idea that saving about £600 a month will touch the sides of putting three kids through private school.

That might be the case but even the most right leaning Rishi fan has to admit that this is beyond tone deaf? Surely?!

The country I grew up in did not have television at all until I was nearly 15. I survived.

And the correct and only answer I would have any respect for is;

’Do you know what, I was really privileged in lots of ways. I have never been a position where I couldn’t eat or heat my house. I’ve been really lucky and being sent to a private school was a privilege many can’t afford.’

Then I’d have a bit of respect. If he then went on to list a load of policies that tackled climate change and social injustice/inequality I might even be tempted to vote for the tiny numpty. But…

He was born in 1980. He was ten when Sky launched in 1990 (I was there at the launch, working my little arse off).

In 1994, when he was a teen at Winchester, Sky cost £18.99 a month. That saving wouldn't get you a private education then just as giving a Sky subscription up now would only be a tiny chip at a yearly Winchester fee.

Someone said this on twitter and it is so accurate:
A more compassionate answer would have been to say ‘I was fortunate. I always had the things I needed - food on the table, a warm home and lots of love and support from my family. I want to make sure children in this country have their needs properly met too.’

But that would have taken some compassion and humility.

No I cant work this out either- for two children? Surely doctors and pharmacists weren't that wealthy in the 80's? Yes maybe normal public schools, but Winchester? There must have been some level of inherited wealth there.

He’s a privately educated man who has been given lots of opportunities on a plate. The poor dab never had to learn good communication skills. They have been assumed to be there with no need to prove himself. He’s as useless as a chocolate teapot. I’m not really much of a fan of Kier, but bloody hell he is head and shoulders above Rishi. Literally and metaphorically.

He made money during the global financial crash, betting against the UK economy... fantastic!!

A GP and a Pharmacist would not have to make too many sacrifices to be able to afford private school.

He should have just been honest (for once) and said that he was very fortunate and didn't go without but he is now driven to make sure fewer people in the UK will go without too.

That he didn't think of a better answer than Sky, brings into question your assertion he is "bright"