Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by abucha3)
    It is not jealousy at all; it is just a case of treating everyone equally. If poor families cannot afford a laptop and broadband connection then it is their duty to seek employment and purchase the services with their own money. The Taxpayer already pays a tremendous amount into welfare for what poor families 'need'; we should not be upping this to now even paying more for something that they don't need.

    Children have access to computers and broadband at school. Adults have access to computers at local libraries and jobs can be found through other means than through the internet.

    This proposal from Ed Balls and Gordon Brown is costly, unfair and completely unnecessary.
    So you've decided its a case of cutting off your nose to spite your face?
    Offline

    8
    (Original post by DayneD89)
    So you've decided its a case of cutting off your nose to spite your face?
    No, I have decided that it's a case opposing excessive welfare and this is what is being proposed, excessive and unnecessary welfare.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by abucha3)
    No, I have decided that it's a case opposing excessive welfare and this is what is being proposed, excessive and unnecessary welfare.
    As I said in my last post, its an investment.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    The most important quote in all of this is, "It's about delivering a more socially just society in which every child can learn, not just some."

    I agree with that view to be honest and abucha, you really don’t understand what it is like to be on a low income (it’s not about finding jobs to pay for things) this only highlights your small mindedness. These parents have low income due to low resources available to them as children and the low quality of education that comes with it.

    This is directly proportional to their future prospects and their future income. This is a means of bringing an end to the divide between children in wealthy families (like myself) to continue to do well with a vast amount of resources and children in poorer families struggling to learn, with severely limited resources.

    It’s a vicious circle if it isn’t brought to an end and for this reason I support the idea. Besides, the more people on facebook I can stalk the better.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    To be fair, there's actually a fair amount of academic debate going on about whether the internet helps or hinders learning. Generally it's believed that it can be a great help but, like anything, is generally not used for its intended purpose. However, the transferrable skills you get while messing about on the internet are arguably more important than your year 5 geography homework.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I'm sure that these laptops are fairly basic, if they are good enough to use for educational needs and accessing the internet then I am fine with that. Education is the most important thing in creating a society of equal opportunity.
    Having said that I also think that it would be a good idea to encourage more people who live in towns to use their library. More funding for these libraries etc so that they are a really good learning resource with a mix of technology and books. Reading does for your mind what athletics does for your body
    Offline

    8
    (Original post by Cardozo)
    I agree with that view to be honest and abucha, you really don’t understand what it is like to be on a low income (it’s not about finding jobs to pay for things) this only highlights your small mindedness. These parents have low income due to low resources available to them as children and the low quality of education that comes with it.

    This is directly proportional to their future prospects and their future income. This is a means of bringing an end to the divide between children in wealthy families (like myself) to continue to do well with a vast amount of resources and children in poorer families struggling to learn, with severely limited resources.
    I am not small minded at all, I just oppose excessive welfare. Rather than just give people laptops and a broadband connection service, we should use other methods which will benefit everyone. As someone else has mentioned we should put more funding into local libraries so that everyone has free access to a wide range of books and a PC.

    We should be doing things like that, rather than just give people laptops because they are poor, because that is just ridiculous. People can't think that they can have anything they want, they have to work for it and then they reep the rewards; surely you learnt that in Primary School?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DayneD89)
    This is pure jelousy. 'I had to pay, why dont they?' because they have much less money. The internet is an amazing resourse. It greatly aids education (which can be the differance between a child from a poorer family spending their life in a low paid job and making a much better job and thus paying more back in taxes) and it is also a great way to look for work without having to spend money on transport. It is a relatively small payment to what can be earnt back in taxes. It is an investment that will also greatly increase the lives of todays poorest.
    I'm sorry but this policy is absolutely deplorable! The "logic" behind it is that apparently, on average, internet access helps students to improve one GCSE by 2 grades (E-C for example). Not only is this just adding to the culture of dependency but Brown has also tried to sell this as "a way for parents to monitor their childrens progress in school". What happened to reports and parents evenings? What happened to taking an interest in your childrens lives?

    And this argument about "I had to pay so why don't they" is perfectly reasonable! To qualify, your family income must be less that around £16000! So it's fair that hard working families on low incomes above that threshold should save up for things they want while others get it handed to them for nothing? It is yet another reason to make people feel like they are penalised for actually working. It's not as if this is an isolated incident, just look at child tax credits, EMA and housing benefit. "Means tested"? Please!

    I would have thought that during one of the worst recessions in recent history and with a huge national defecit that there maybe better things to spend £300 million pounds on!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by abucha3)
    I think it's disgraceful. Why should the Taxpayer have to pay for poor people to be equipped with a laptop and broadband connection? My family purchased a laptop and pays a monthly fee for broadband. There is absolutely no good reason why people should just get it for free; the should get a job and buy it themselves. Remember these are luxuries, not needs.

    I would wonder the worth of these laptops and the speed of the internet.
    The laptops will be awfull no doubt (apparently some may be like netbooks) but I totally agree with you, this isn't the point. Internet access is a luxury, as is a laptop! We'd better be careful about hiring private tutors from now on. If statistics show that they help to improve grades, Gordon Brown may suggest that we pay for the poor to have those too!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Lol, you guys need to look into this more before you make assumptions. Although I do think that Brown's policy is pretty silly.

    Bearing in mind that Labour promised us laptops for hire in the nineties...
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Freddy Jnr)
    The laptops will be awfull no doubt (apparently some may be like netbooks) but I totally agree with you, this isn't the point. Internet access is a luxury, as is a laptop! We'd better be careful about hiring private tutors from now on. If statistics show that they help to improve grades, Gordon Brown may suggest that we pay for the poor to have those too!
    The perception that the internet is a luxury is actually false. Take the recent school closures due to the snow: the information is most readily available via the internet and it is therefore important that people have access to it at home. Similarly, if people who live in poverty are denied access to the internet how are they ever to compete with those who use it as and when they feel like? This is a mechanism for enabling those with limited or no access to the internet - as an educational medium - to use it and to gain from that use. It is folly of the Right to decry this as a needless expense when you hop over the very fact that this is one way of helping people to compete in that marketplace that you cherish so dearly.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by abucha3)
    It is not jealousy at all; it is just a case of treating everyone equally.
    Making sure everyone is advantaged enough to realize their potential requires not treating everyone the same in the society we're in.

    (Original post by abucha3)
    People can't think that they can have anything they want, they have to work for it and then they reep the rewards; surely you learnt that in Primary School?
    oh, so the harder you work, the richer you'll be? it's nothing to do with luck?!!! :laugh:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Adorno)
    The perception that the internet is a luxury is actually false. Take the recent school closures due to the snow: the information is most readily available via the internet and it is therefore important that people have access to it at home. Similarly, if people who live in poverty are denied access to the internet how are they ever to compete with those who use it as and when they feel like? This is a mechanism for enabling those with limited or no access to the internet - as an educational medium - to use it and to gain from that use. It is folly of the Right to decry this as a needless expense when you hop over the very fact that this is one way of helping people to compete in that marketplace that you cherish so dearly.
    I wonder how anyone managed to do schoolwork or look for jobs before the internet!!! Of COURSE people with money are at an advantage but where is this levelling going to stop? Generally, the children of the well off receive more support and encouragement from their parents. What would you like to see done about that?

    And I'm all for people competing in the marketplace that I "cherish so dearly", social mobility etc but people need to start helping themselves! Of course it's more difficult for some that others but this isn't always a matter of money. People from all backgrounds have gone on to achieve great things, not all of them supported by other peoples money!

    It's ideas like this that force people to the right.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lotsofsnails)
    oh, so the harder you work, the richer you'll be? it's nothing to do with luck?!!! :laugh:
    I quite agree. Many people receive money for doing but spitting out children while others work hard just to make ends meet. Wouldn't call it luck though!

    :p:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    People who can afford the internet are advantaged, so its not reall fair that poorer people are disadvantaged due to something they cant afford and this just makes a huge cycle, cause they can't get richer to afford any of this due to not being able to afford it in the first place. Although giving them FREE laptops i think is RIDICULOUS and a waste of money, which can be spent on schools and hospitals etc. But, helping them get cheap and easy access is impotant! I mean, if we dont help those who can't afford it somehow get some kind of access to internet the class gaps are just going to widen, making society even less equal. Material Deprivation does make a quite a difference in achievement etc, these are the type of things we look into in Sociology. Its not really fair how some people can be advantaged due to their background, as some working class people do want to achieve but are put to a disadvantage, so for those who want to achieve, why not help them by giving them easier access to the means to do so.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Girasole)
    Although giving them FREE laptops i think is RIDICULOUS and a waste of money, which can be spent on schools and hospitals etc.
    In a sense this is targetted funding for education...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Adorno)
    In a sense this is targetted funding for education...
    True, but something like a free internet access place, where they can get on a computer like you would at an internet cafe, but for free or give them a monthly or weekly quota in which they only have to pay if they exceed this or something would be better, or giving them free internet apposed to free laptops, or atleast cheaper laptops would be better, as after all end of the day, it all adds up.
    Offline

    8
    (Original post by Adorno)
    In a sense this is targetted funding for education...
    How do we know it will be used for education? They could be sold or used for other purposes; this scheme will be heavily abused.

    We can invest into education by increasing our budget for schools and for local libraries, rather than just hand-out free laptops.
    Offline

    8
    (Original post by lotsofsnails)
    oh, so the harder you work, the richer you'll be? it's nothing to do with luck?!!! :laugh:
    Yes. People can have a free education and by working hard they will obtain good grades. They can then be recruited into a well-paying job because they have worked hard to get there. Hence, the harder we work the more money we will have.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by abucha3)
    Yes. People can have a free education and by working hard they will obtain good grades. They can then be recruited into a well-paying job because they have worked hard to get there. Hence, the harder we work the more money we will have.
    Sadly we do not live in a meritocracy and this kind of opinion, while probably something we would all like to see, is not actually grounded in reality. It's not what you know so much as who you know, and certain qualifications mean literally nothing nowadays as grade inflation sets. And if you think that everyone who works hard will automatically get good grades, you've clearly been home schooled, or perhaps just not beenpaying attention to the less gifted pupils surrounding you. Sometimes those who work the hardest are those with the least ability in terms of academia.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: December 8, 2017
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.