Are Public Schools such as Eton and Harrow a blight on British society?

Dealing with this problem is incredibly hard.

There is no real 'solution' to this problem.

I propose that more money is invested into state primary schools as this will help build the foundations for success. This will ideally reduce the number of people who are illiterate and become more intelligent and allow people from a lower socioeconomic status to expect more from themselves. This with the help of public schools opening up places to a larger group of people from lower social classes through bursaries and scholarships , will increase the number of people who receive a world class education.

.

I am not sure why I found this so funny.

Yep. I actually can't look at Boris Johnson and not laugh.

It's physically impossible.

Attendance at Oxbridge is an indication of academic attainment and ability, not of wealth.

There goes your credibility on this issue. Can't say that I expected much better.

Well I'm glad I didn't disappoint you, at least.

Probably not as glad as you are of overstating your own achievements, but hey-ho. Your self-esteem has to come from somewhere.

The point I was trying to make, before you started trying to bicker with me for some reason, was not that there is no link between Oxbridge attendance and background

Attendance at Oxbridge is an indication of academic attainment and ability, not of wealth.

It's best not to make a habit out of lying about what you said one page previously, if what you're here to do is discuss the issue.

Oh, sure, there's no doubt that background is a factor in determining how likely someone is to reach the required standard at 18. Incidentally, this differs as much between good and bad state schools as between state and private schools (there are some top state schools in, ah, 'leafy' areas which send loads of people to Oxbridge), and is affected by parents and other home factors too, not just by schooling.

The answer to this, as far as there can be one, is to make sure everyone has access to the sort of educational environment that can prepare them adequately for Oxbridge. This does not justify the government telling people that they can't spend their money on their children's education, even if it would solve the problem -- which it categorically wouldn't.

Beyond improving state schooling, there are some deeper problems, such as a lack of academic motivation, lack of respect for education, amongst people from certain backgrounds, etc, that will always be difficult. At this point the state ends up with a bit of a leading a horse to water situation. We should do what we can, through state programs, to motivate people from all backgrounds to take advantage of the opportunities available to them, but we shouldn't necessarily expect that we will ever have equal numbers of attendees of Oxbridge or other top universities from all backgrounds, because there's unfortunately no equally effective replacement for parental motivation.

I think I'll just paste my response. Hope you've got out of your system whatever you were trying to get out of your system

I have no idea what you're referring to. You made a false statement and then attempted to pretend that you hadn't; I pointed it out.

I'm done here. There's little point (beyond pointing out the contradictions) in arguing with a privately-educated person who is convinced that he earned his place at Cambridge.

It's best not to make a habit out of lying about what you said one page previously, if what you're here to do is discuss the issue.

Without them, we'd not have nearly as many fine Sky TV shows. I say let them stay.

That applies with all fee paying schools. However, for the minority of students who go to these places on a bursary the benefits they receive are endless and significantly more than what they'd receive at a state school.

Society will always be a place where the wealthy dominate. Take a look at our cabinet ministers and our Prime Minister. 50% went to Oxbridge wit the majority going to public and independent schools like Eton.