[marcusfox]

(Original post by Mister Dead)
your analogy is very silly indeed.

It is accurate.

You are in favour of the wealthy and privileged having their possessions redistributed so the poor may be better off, but you forget that compared to some people in the world, even some people in the UK, you are comparatively wealthy.

You are only calling it silly because it's not the type of socialism you want - the type where everybody else's possessions gets redistributed, but your own is somehow exempt.

So at least we agree on one thing.

You want to help out people from 'disadvantaged backgrounds and have the odds stacked against them already' as long as in doing so, you personally are not losing your 'privileged position or luxury assets' in any way.

[Mister Dead]

(Original post by marcusfox)
It is accurate.

You are in favour of the wealthy and privileged having their possessions redistributed so the poor may be better off

am I. When?

Find that bit please, because that was the first point I started frowning at your analogy.

[Mister Dead]

(Original post by marcusfox)

You want to help out people from 'disadvantaged backgrounds and have the odds stacked against them already' as long as in doing so, you personally are not losing your 'privileged position or luxury assets' in any way.

Please stop repeating this. It doesn't make it true.

Firstly, as stated above, you invented that I ever said the rich should have their wealth redistributed.

And secondly because you don't know anything about me, so it makes you look like a buffoon. As it happens I have no wealth to speak of, no house or possessions of note. The reason for this is that I have always worked for charities/healthcare and in roles that has paid very little. Most of these roles have involved working with people from the very poorest and most disadvantaged walks of life. I sacrificed any possibility of privilige or luxury when I chose to do these jobs. It's no big deal at all, obviously, but if you want to talk about 'relative' poverty, then we can talk about 'relative' sacrifice and say that yes, I have chosen to sacrifice privilige and luxory to attempt to help others.

[marcusfox]

(Original post by Mister Dead)
Please stop repeating this. It doesn't make it true.

Firstly, as stated above, you invented that I ever said the rich should have their wealth redistributed.

And secondly because you don't know anything about me, so it makes you look like a buffoon. As it happens I have no wealth to speak of, no house or possessions of note. The reason for this is that I have always worked for charities/healthcare and in roles that has paid very little. Most of these roles have involved working with people from the very poorest and most disadvantaged walks of life. I sacrificed any possibility of privilige or luxury when I chose to do these jobs. It's no big deal at all, obviously, but if you want to talk about 'relative' poverty, then we can talk about 'relative' sacrifice and say that yes, I have chosen to sacrifice privilige and luxory to attempt to help others.

Yes, you never said that the rich should have their wealth redistributed. But all those who are coming out saying that private schools should be banned because it wasn't fair that they, along with most people had to make do with a state school and that by extension, everyone should have to make do with a state school.

It is accurate to say though that there are people in the world disadvantaged in terms of more than just education, but in terms of housing and living conditions.

Therefore it's not a flawed analogy to point out that compared to most people in the world, these people complaining about wanting to take (private schools or whatever) away from those they perceive to be privileged are hypocrites when it comes to their own comfort and convenience.

[Mister Dead]

(Original post by marcusfox)
Yes, you never said that the rich should have their wealth redistributed. But all those who are coming out saying that private schools should be banned because it wasn't fair that they, along with most people had to make do with a state school and that by extension, everyone should have to make do with a state school.

Well i'm not sure I agree with them, but i do think there is a bit of a problem in that people from poor backgrounds are heavily underrepresented in positions of influence.

[marcusfox]

(Original post by Mister Dead)
Well i'm not sure I agree with them, but i do think there is a bit of a problem in that people from poor backgrounds are heavily underrepresented in positions of influence.

Gordon Brown came from a humble beginning and look where he is now. He never went to a private school. As did many people who came up through the tripartite education system.

[Dee Leigh]

(Original post by Mister Dead)
Slow hand clap for you. Well done mate, what a hero you are. Now everyone can step up and inflate your ego and tell you what a guy, what a guy.

This attitude makes me so angry. Since when did we start dismissing issues in England just because there are more extreme issues abroad. And since when has wanting to try and provide the best start in life for children, especially in the case of children that come from disadvantaged backgrounds and have the odds stacked against them already, since when was that 'complaining'.

Isn't it possible for people to stop comparing everything to what they achieved for just one second and place themselves in the shoes of others.

I wasn't expecting an ego boost...my point is that life is unfair anyway so people should stop complaining and deal with it.

This was posted from The Student Room's Android App on my GT-S5830

[recurring500]

(Original post by Mister Dead)
Well i'm not sure I agree with them, but i do think there is a bit of a problem in that people from poor backgrounds are heavily underrepresented in positions of influence.

Good god, I've just read your posts and you really are away with the fairies. You make out that there is a great disparity between independent and state schools, a disparity that is denying people their chance in life. You still don't seem to appreciate how much we have compared to others. The fact is, anyone who has the privilege to live in the UK and is determined to be a success in life, can be; and there are many, many, many examples of people who have done this from nothing!

You dismiss others opinions and force your views on others. When someone has an argument that evidently outweighs your entire philosophy you claim they are trying to 'boost their ego'.

I have been able to visit several incredibly poor countries around the world where people depend on scavenging and begging. There is no welfare state, certainly no education system and in some cases no clean water. These are people who live in real poverty. You make out that anyone who doesn't go to private school lives in poverty and is greatly disadvantaged, when actually they are very, very privileged.

As I said before, the gap between private and state schools is microscopic and there are much more pressing issues that time and energy can be spent on. Appreciate the things you have and open your eyes!

[ufo2012]

I thought I had nothing to add to this thread, but I can see the relevance here across a couple of topics...

This news article:

The boy who was allowed to sit maths A-level papers TWENTY NINE times until he got enough marks to pass
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...s-A-level.html

shows a major disparity between the rich and poor.

Who paid for all these resits just so this guy could pass?

And the fact he was allowed to do so, is a ******* disgrace to the education system.

And all this 'he got there in the end' BS. He attempted the exam and he FAILED.

It is as if we are afraid to say that.

He had to take it twenty-something times again before passing. But that won't show up on his C.V. or application form.

Further down the article it mentions some universities are now refusing to accept resit results - about ******* time too!

[Mister Dead]

(Original post by recurring500)
Good god, I've just read your posts and you really are away with the fairies. You make out that there is a great disparity between independent and state schools, a disparity that is denying people their chance in life. You still don't seem to appreciate how much we have compared to others. The fact is, anyone who has the privilege to live in the UK and is determined to be a success in life, can be; and there are many, many, many examples of people who have done this from nothing!

You dismiss others opinions and force your views on others. When someone has an argument that evidently outweighs your entire philosophy you claim they are trying to 'boost their ego'.

I have been able to visit several incredibly poor countries around the world where people depend on scavenging and begging. There is no welfare state, certainly no education system and in some cases no clean water. These are people who live in real poverty.

this is utter, utter cobblers. Arguments that evidently outweigh my whole philosophy amount to 'stop complaining, it's worse in other places' as if this someohow negates poverty in this country. Your 'examples of people that achieve from nothing' is also useless. Of course people can achieve from nothing. The question is wether it's right that the odds are so heavily stacked against children born into poverty/poor families

You make out that anyone who doesn't go to private school lives in poverty and is greatly disadvantaged, when actually they are very, very privileged.

I did nothing of the sort. i was talking about poverty - yes, that's right, poverty. It exists - homelessness, hunger, prositution, abuse, drug abuse, imprisoned family members, lack of access to culture, violence. Moral poverty that children grow up in every single day. So what we're talking about here is education and wether it can be improved sufficiently to be able to say that these children were equal in at least one respect - that of daytime schooling.

and there are much more pressing issues that time and energy can be spent on. Appreciate the things you have and open your eyes!

Why are you attempting to paint me as ungrateful and turn this into a personal issue; you've no idea how I value what I own and the opportunities I have been given, so how dare you.

[sputum]

(Original post by gorton_k)

I can point you at studies that look at the significance of the difference between results obtained in private and state schools if you like, which control for factors such as parental income, parental marital status, number of siblings, location, und zu weiter, and private education is shown to provide a very significant advantage.

Please do (but only if you want to discuss them informally ) Most of the stuff I've come across seems to have a nice round number in one paragraph hedged around by multitudinous caveats elsewhere.
Try finding one that addresses how accurate its conclusions are in a quantitative way, I'd love to see it. Or one with any kind of predictive power.

(I'm more interested in statistical limitations than the point at hand, there may be additional factors of privilege not in these studies for all I know) don't see much on the effect of competitive selection and scholarship on cohort composition. Just snoop-a-dataset.

Of course correlation does not imply causation, pirates and global warming and all that, but by controlling for as many other factors that are different between the two sets, or studying subsets which have shared home factors, then you can get pretty damn far!

If we take for granted the unfairness, your proposed remedy is unworkable. You can't force parents not to spend money on their child's education or expect any sort of enforcement. Parenthood doesn't work that way (look at the influence of state school catchment areas on house prices, is it fair that poorer kids get to go to worse state schools than others?)

What unavoidable unfairness would the dismantling of private education cause?

It won't help. Parents will find ways to give their children advantages. Private school is something of a symbol for an entrenched privilege rather than a prime cause in my (unsubstantiated) opinion. There are social elements underpinning privilege that are hard to legislate out of existence (and it's not just the most privileged helping their own 'unfairly' it's just that some are better equipped to do this than others what else are you supposed to do as a parent? not that I am lol)

Not to mention the law of unintended consequences applies here as usual when simple solutions are mooted for complicated and ill-defined problems.

Part of me wants to try it just to see what happens though