THe upper middle class favour immigration

[MeouwCat]

The upper middle class favour immigration because the alternative would be paying locals more and that would men them paying higher taxes to support the wage demands by care workers/Nurses/council workers etc.

That makes no sense. What do you mean stopped work so they don't have to pay child benefit?

I doubt very much that many of these thugs are suitable to work in the sectors we need workers in e.g. Care, Hospitality, NHS etc.

Racial prejudice always erupts at times of peak economic anxiety. The government ruins the economy then demonises any racial or minority group that is likely to be competing for wages against the white working class.
Then the same government makes a show of restricting the economic viability of those minority groups, pretending to 'save' the working classes - Brexit, 'restrictive' immigration policies , media hysteria and other extreme laws (Rwanda anyone)...

The same Conservative government that was screaming about curbing immigration was running mass recruitment campaigns in my birth country for nurses and teachers. All while telling us that immigration is the devil that is ruining this great nation.

This might be a new phenomenon here, but has been rehashed many times over in the US since the 1800s - Chinese, Blacks, Mexicans, on and on it goes...

The government has always been the problem, not immigration.

Thanks for spelling this out and for the other posters who have shared reason and facts.

Right, because society has improved so much since. As have people’s life chances.

Apologies - I meant child maintenance. Sorry.

Exactly this.

The ills of society/lack of social mobility aren't down to the reduction in Grammar schools, i'd argue the imposition of some of the worlds highest tuition fees, including for non degree subjects, has had a far bigger impact, as has housing costs.
Add in successive Governments that have not invested in secondary education.

YES. The amount of social mobility in the 60s frightened the upper middle, who wanted to continue being able to slide Rupert and Hugo into high paying white collar jobs and didn't like the fact that Darren and Kevin were brighter, more motivated and tkaing those jobs.

So they pulled up the ladder.

Unfortunately, Rupert, Hugo and their ilk are fairly well menaing but thick as pig shit which is why we now have what the economists call a 'crisis of competency' at the highest levels of business, civil service and healthcare, and as ever, its the wokring classes who are suffering for it.

I totally see where you are coming from. I think the issue is that there are so few grammar schools that they do become insanely competitive - you have to have enough £££ to be in the correct area and then everyone tutors as everyone has moved to the area with the exact same idea. If there were more grammar schools there would be more places and hopefully genuine opportunity for students.

'Secondary moderns' could be better at pitching themselves as a superb option for middle class students - not every decent career needs a university degree.

And you sound like a foul mouthed witch, and probably the biggest dickhead on here. I’m glad I don’t know you in real life because you sound like one of those people nobody wants to stand next to in the post office.

I would still have an issue with dividing at age 11. My eldest DC has left school with “top grades”, no way were they operating at that level aged 11. I also don’t understand how children who are not all rounders are catered for - if a child is a maths genius but poor at English where should this child be placed? Perhaps this is dealt with just fine in granting grammar places, I don’t know how the system works.

What I would like to see is more social status being attached to non-white collar employment. Jobs requiring high levels of technical knowledge or high societal worth absolutely deserve it.

Some of this thread is interesting and some of it is absolutely foul.

I would say its much more to do with the decline in early years investment. Most educationists agree that is what makes the difference, but sure start, which was demonstrably working was cut by the coalition government. Alongside lack of investment in secondary and particularly investment in quality training for those that aren't suitable for whatever reason to go to university. And lack of investment in older people who missed out when they were younger, for whatever reason but ould be trained to do meaningful jobs. And getting people off longterm sick/disablity that could also work with the right support.

The whole point of grammar schools is that there are few of them. It wouldn't matter if they were all over the country, it would still be the same proportion of children that went to them. That is literally the point of them.

I don’t understand why every local school can’t be excellent, can’t have the same high standards of pastoral care and sporting and academic opportunities.

Most of 'those jobs' pay badly because of misogyny.

See doctors pay - it largely got worse when women became a large part of the work force.

I'm not upper middle class but im hugely in favour of freedom of movt. Borders are largely a modern invention.

Ah OK!

. . . and some of it is amusingly 'handbag':

you sound like one of those people nobody wants to stand next to in the post office

😄

All schools should strive to be excellent. However that doesn’t mean the brightest kids should be denied the opportunity of attending excellent schools that are more academically rigorous than other excellent schools. Why lump everyone in together?

No one moans about lack of equality in the German school system, and that’s very similar to the old grammar school system. Which still exists in Northern Ireland, by the way, and you don’t hear anyone from there moaning either.

Instead of abolishing grammar schools, why didn’t the champagne socialists in the 1960s and 1970s simply try to improve secondary moderns and make them equally excellent? No, they took a look at what was happening around them - how the art was influencing society, changing opinions and values, changing the status quo - and they decided no more. Maybe if the people producing that art weren’t for the most part grammar school boys, they wouldn’t have gone all out to deny that opportunity to others. Then again, the world would much poorer for it. As it is now that we no longer produce great art. Is it any wonder?

What are you talking about? Do you have any evidence at all? Who were the great working class artists who changed society before the 60s?

"All schools should strive to be excellent. However that doesn’t mean the brightest kids should be denied the opportunity of attending excellent schools that are more academically rigorous than other excellent schools. Why lump everyone in together?"

Because selection at 11 can't be made fair and is damaging to the education of those children who don't attend selective schools.

"Instead of abolishing grammar schools, why didn’t the champagne socialists in the 1960s and 1970s simply try to improve secondary moderns and make them equally excellent?"

Repeat: selection at 11 can't be made fair. The idea that kids are either 'bright' or 'not bright' is nonsense and that this can be identified accurately at 11 or 13 is bs.

Yes, this. Primary schools in London are closing due to the low birth rate. Who's going to pay taxes when u are in a care home? Immigration is vital and makes the country stronger.

I’m sorry, I have no interest in engaging with someone as rude as you.

If you haven’t heard about the cultural revolution that took place in this country in the 1960s, I can’t help you frankly. Try getting off Mumsnet and reading a book.

Um, because they are not funded adequately. In my school they've halved the number of TAs over the years and there is very little SEND support. No staff for meaningful interventions. In some primaries HLTAs teach art and DT.