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

[breadandbutterfly]

...and are patronising bastards to boot.

See:

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/apr/09/social-mobility-suzanne-moore

Esp enjoy the comment at 9 April 2011 9:32AM -

"The Camerons know how to 'work' their connections, too. David Cameron got his first job as a researcher for Tim Rathbone, his godfather and Conservative MP for Lewes.

Three months later he went to Hong Kong to work at the conglomerate Jardine Matheson - Daddy was stockbroker to the chairman, providing a fast-track into the business world.

When the young Cameron was due to attend a job interview at Conservative Central Office, a phone call was received from Buckingham Palace. "I understand you are to see David Cameron," said the caller. "I am ringing to tell you that you are about to meet a truly remarkable young man."

It has been speculated that the mystery call was from Captain Sir Alastair Aird, Equerry to the Queen Mother and husband of Cameron's godmother. The Airds vigorously denied it. Others have suggested the caller might have been Sir Brian McGrath, a family friend who was private secretary to Prince Philip. But he, too, though named as a referee for the job, denies it firmly".

You couldn't make it up could you? They're all in it together.
"

And here is a link to the treasury's household impact assessment (to 2012/13), showing how tax and benefit changes impact each income decile so that you can at least make an educated attack on their policies.

being a tory supporter does not necessarily equate with being well off. my parents always voted tory and are working class.
Plenty of labour Mp's come from wealthy families. So what?? Are they good at their job, thats what i want to know.
You don't need to break a leg to know it hurts, likewise you don't have to have been on benefits to know money is tight. anyway government is to represent all sections of society not just the moaning lower classes

Is 'social mobility' a particularly left wing ideology, then?

It doesn't seem so to me. Left wing ideologies appear to be about equality and fairness. But a true meritocracy allows those who are most able and hardworking to prosper, whilst the less able remain (relatively) poor.

Social mobility as an ideology assumes that moving from 'working class' to 'middle class' is a desirable aim. Is this really a left wing opinion?

However, most Tories want others to share their values - such as aspirations, independence, work ethic and valuing education. So I can see how social mobility fits into Tory ideology.

Aspiration?, independence?, a work ethic!?!? Valuing educashun????

Tory scum!

This conversation angers me. Since when does a politician or activist have to be salt of the earth to have a view on social justice? Would our society have eradicated slavery, or given women the right to vote, without the vision and assistance of rich and privileged people who felt a moral duty to change society?

And networking isn't limited to the rich - anyone is more likely to get a job, etc. if they ask everyone they know if they can help.

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.

"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......

Not really sure why you think this is about Conservatives hating change, smallwhitecat? Few on the left would argue that - contrary to their name - the Conservatives embrace change, particularly where it involves their rich friends becoming even richer.

You appear to have missed the coalition plans to expand internships to those without 'sharp elbowed' middle class parents - and nick Clegg's painful outing following this as someone who had himself been the beneficiary of exactly that kind of 'sharp elbowed' parenting he now professed to disdain so much in the middle classes.

Yet for some reason, Cameron's own hypocrisy on this has not been remarked on. Hence this thread.

Given that Call Me Dave's whole shtick was based on him just being an ordinary Joe like the rest of us, able to understand our everyday concerns despite being a multimillionaire who went to Eton, I think it helps to explain to baffled Tory voters why Cameron's actions in power do not remotely address their needs - and are never likely to.

Of course the man need not reflect his upbringing - and I would give him full credit for it if any single action of his suggested that he sided with anyone other than the extremely wealthy lot he is part of - but sadly I cannot find one.

I would dearly welcome it if Cameron turned out to be a kind of 19th century style patriarchal social reformer - but if so, he's certainly going about it in the most illogical way imaginable.

I don't dislike him because he's posh and rich - that's not his fault. I dislike him because he's evil. Morally bad. And seeking to undermine our country for the good of a tiny handful of already loaded cronies.

I think the OP suggested why/how he has turned out that way - an insight into his psychology that all those claiming the leopard can change his spots might want to bear in mind when it's time to vote.

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

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?

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 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.

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.

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

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

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

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.

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.

"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

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.

'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

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

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

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