O/T Well it looks like White Lives don't matter.

[great_fire]

It wasn't austerity like Greece had austerity, or Britain in the 40s and 50s, with rationing.

It's a bit like how poverty seems to be defined as not having the latest model iPhone and an LED TV instead of OLED.

My grandparents had an outdoor toilet, a tin bath, no fridge, a mangle instead of a washing machine, no central heating, no double glazing, it's not really comparable.

[KerrAvon]

I've been extremely lucky to have the parents I have had, and its one of the things I am most grateful for.

But it still doesn't alter my point. If you go to a 'rough' school, or you go to a 'privileged' school and you hypothetically had exactly the same teachers, the fact your classmates have parents better able to equip them for learning has a huge impact on the academic potential of all the students.

When I tell my friends who went to boarding or grammar schools, they cannot comprehend some of the stories from my time at Clifton in the 90s. I literally remember entire 2 hour lessons where we didn't even open our book and learn a single thing because the class was so completely out of control and the teacher had to leave in tears. We were like a pack of wild animals in some lessons, and even the 'good' students like me didn't have any work to do because the teacher had too big of a task trying to get the class under control.

The imbalance is huge, the gulf in access to opportunity is huge. Its not the parents' fault if they were failed by the same system too. Rotherham is economically deprived because of the collapse of the local industry and neglect from the government to support and re-train the workforce. That's the simple reality of why things are how they are.

To argue the system is 'fair' that working class people have poorer outcomes, you'd almost have to argue that you think parents from Rotherham are genetically less capable than parents from more prosperous parts of the country. That's obviously ludicrous.

We are all shaped by our experiences, John. The mistake is to assume that the view that we have been given of the world represents the whole or even an accurate picture.

I went to South Grove in the 1970s and it certainly wasn't comparable to Eton. In my first year, the kid who sat next to me disappeared for several weeks and when he returned our form teacher innocently asked him where he had been. His response was 'I didn't have any shoes, Miss' (although not as well punctuated as South Grove didn't teach such things). That's real poverty - not the 'relative poverty' that we prefer to measure now. Despite his poverty and that of many kids in the school, he and, by and large, everybody got on with trying to learn to the best of their ability (ok, we cut up in music and RE a bit). The class system didn't seem to make them kick off in class (no pun intended).

Your experience at Clifton is not untypical of life in state schools. I now live in a pretty affluent part of the country out in the heart of the backwaters - it's a true blue constituency that the Tories hold with majority that would need a massive swing to be overturned. The Tories would probabaly have to be reduced to low double figures for it to happen. There is poverty - rural poverty - which no political party wants to talk about, but, by and large, most people are reasonably well off.

And my local state secondary school is a zoo.

I have heard exactly the same description of behaviour there as yours of Clifton, with lessons being compleley ineffective because teachers can't get a grip of the class. It takes kids from outstanding village primary schools and then lets then large numbers of them fail. I know a number of parents who have simply given up and have taken the decision to scrimp and save to put their kids through the private sytem instead - people who have remortgaged their homes, or taken on extra jobs or both to try to get their kids educated.

I get completely (how could I not) that Rotherham has suffered massive economic shocks in the last forty years or so (they were the foreunner of the international redistribution of wealth that WanChais' epic post from a couple of days ago envisages) and I think it beyond doubt that people suffered a loss of self esteeem and self confidence along with their jobs. I get too that substance abuse of one sort or another would have thrived in the aftermath. That certainly contributes to some of the ills that exsist in Rotherham today but to hold that out as the explanation or - worse still - an excuse for what is happening in schools simply doesn't hold water. Where I live now suffered no such shocks, just a gradual drift out of farm labouring as that industry became more mechanised after WW2.

There are a number of factors at play - not least the disastrous 'one size fits all' state education sytem with mixed abilty classes; a system which far from recognising and celebrating diversity actually treats kids as a homogenous mass. But I simply do not accept your comment that Its not the parents' fault if they were failed by the same system too. I think completely the opposite and that the no fault, blame free (unless its Thatcher, IDS, BoJo, Cummings or any othjer hate figure of the Left that is in the frame) culture that is fashionable today is a big part of the problem.

If a person has a had a tough start, being brought up in poverty, perhaps against a back drop of substance abuse, then they have choice; they can say 'I don't give a damn- little Johny can do what he likes cos I know my rights and my Social Worker will sort it out' or they can say ''*******s - little Johnny is having better than I did and I am going to make sure it happens'.

I get that many people brought up in diffilcult circumstances may be ill equipped to make the right choice - in my work I meet such people almost every day - but to say, as you do-that they carry no fault - that they bear no responsibilty for the choices that they make is just plain wrong. And frankly, John, it's patronising and it is part of the problem as it perpetuates a victim culture rather than pointing out the real choices that people have.

You say elsewhere that you would 'invest funds in the grassroots level in creating opportunities to help level the playing field' What exactly do you mean by that?

[Exiletyke]

Originally Posted by KerrAvon View Post
Perhaps they fought through belief in their country, the value they saw in it and what it had given them?

Of course it's easy to scoff at that sort of thing now. It's terribly unfashionable in a time where staying on trend means ignoring our long history of liberal democracy (albeit blemished like every human history) and wringing our hands at past failings instead.






I know you had to bugger off quickly after posting this tripe but I supplied you with the following to enable you to give some reasoned response


over 40% of the returning soldiers were not even entitled to vote, some country some belief

After the Third Reform Act in 1884, 60% of male householders over the age of 21 had the vote.[9] This left 40% who did not - including the poorest in society. Thus millions of soldiers returning from World War I would still not have been entitled to vote in the long overdue general election. (The last election had been in December 1910. An election had been scheduled for 1916, but was postponed to a time after the war


Care to pick up where you left off?.
As I know you would wish to clarify your position & may have forgotten how you left it

[gm_gm]

*Facepalm*

My entire argument is that the fact there are exceptions, myself included, doesn't mean the rule isn't true.

A big problem society has is perceiving the 'skill' to work hard as some magical thing that those deserving are born with, and those who are not deserving are not.

The reality is, hard work and even aspiration and ambition are skills that need to be taught by those lucky enough to have acquired those skills themselves.

It is an indisputatable fact that a child born and going to Clifton school in Rotherham is going to have massively poorer life prospects than a child born in the wealthy Clifton area of prosperous Bristol.

The parents aren't biologically 'superior', they just happen to have been born in a 'haves' part of the country than a 'have-nots' part.

Its staggering to see people try and argue the class system we have is fair. Its not. The people of Rotherham are just as capable at birth of hard work, and high professional and academic attainment as any other human on the planet. Until the people of Rotherham are achieving this we should be fighting to fix this inequality, not accepting our lot as though we are somehow undeserving.

Largely agree John. There is a huge advantages attending a public school such as Eton as we all know, but how do you undo the class system? dont think you can.

I think class is a bit of a red herring, I think better education in grass roots schools and a completely different mind set is needed. My brother paid for his own education, his drive was incredible born in a 3k council house hes a multi-millionaire but his class is unchanged.

We cant all be billionaires, there will always be rich and poor (unless we have a different type of system and then we will all be poor) We do need to address the taxes the super rich pay, said it a million times not just in business, people like Lewis Hamilton buying his helicopter in the Isle of Man to save £250m in VAT, the wealthy Russians who have managed to get here via golden passports and the companies who manage to dodge £bns

[gm_gm]

I left the mining industry in 1987 of my own accord and after my old man gave me the best piece of advice he ever gave me .

" Get out now lad whilst tha not competing with thousands more for the few jobs there will be , get a head start "

Initially I got a job on less money but found another one 12 months later that paid reasonably well .

Without that advice I could have stayed in the industry till the bitter end in 1993 , picked my brass up and then see it dwindle away to nowt because in 90's South Yorkshire there was feck all going jobs wise , things could have been very different .

I was lucky to get that advice and although I've been made redundant a few times since I've managed to have a reasonable financial life , not loaded , steady but I've put the hours in too , 12 hour shifts , weekends , you name it .

Things like that can make a huge difference going forward in life .

Everyone at some point needs to catch a wave and some posters on here aren't prepared to look much past the wave they caught , nobody's is disputing how hard anyone's grafted .

The lack of investment in areas like South Yorkshire should shame both sides of the political divide because they didn't give a shyte and I do mean both sides of the divide .

The more you invest in areas like this the more you increase the chances of people catching the wave .

It really is that simple , no self pity , no Citizen Smith just a reasonable analysis on reality .

Great post Animal

[animallittle3]

It wasn't austerity like Greece had austerity, or Britain in the 40s and 50s, with rationing.

It's a bit like how poverty seems to be defined as not having the latest model iPhone and an LED TV instead of OLED.

My grandparents had an outdoor toilet, a tin bath, no fridge, a mangle instead of a washing machine, no central heating, no double glazing, it's not really comparable.

Tha looking at it the wrong way Fire .

The public sector got a proper battering , over 20k less police officers , NHS beds cut so much they had to use hospital corridors , higher waiting lists due to NHS staff shortages , they shut down a specialist unit in a Leeds hospital for kids which served a great part of Yorkshire and the next nearest one was in Newcastle .

Local libraries shutting down , council budgets cut so much they could barely provide a service .

Benefits were slashed for the disabled and long term sick .

Fire service also took a hammering with less staff .

It generally played out in the private sector with pay increases at a minimum if you got one at all .

The irony is most of it was ideologically driven , small state etc and Johnson knows he can't really go back to that but given the pandemic and its effects and what's coming down the road I think most people would accept austerity now .

Stands to sense that if the furlough scheme alone is costing £14bn a month you'd expect to see government spending cut back .

Burned their bridges on that now , unnecessarily probably .

As I say I ain't going to knock the bloke if he's spending money in needed areas , fair play but tha can't help feeling it's heading towards reckless and feeding his ego .

He's a good news merchant , at his best when he's the good guy but the job of PM is what's best for the country and that's not always what folk like .

It isn't a job for Santa Claus , remember his Garden Bridge project when he was Mayor of London .

Bound to be some recriminations for him in the Tory Party if he's spending brass like it's going out of fashion just to keep himself popular , they just don't operate that way .

He's a cabinet full of yes men so he's no problem there but the 1922 Committee and donors hold some real clout .

Not against his sentiment but unsure about the reality .

[John2]

I get that many people brought up in diffilcult circumstances may be ill equipped to make the right choice - in my work I meet such people almost every day - but to say, as you do-that they carry no fault - that they bear no responsibilty for the choices that they make is just plain wrong. And frankly, John, it's patronising and it is part of the problem as it perpetuates a victim culture rather than pointing out the real choices that people have.

You say elsewhere that you would 'invest funds in the grassroots level in creating opportunities to help level the playing field' What exactly do you mean by that?

At an individual level, I agree. As a society it is harmful to ignore the importance of personal responsibility.

That said, from a philosophical level I believe that every human on the planet is a product of their environment and DNA. I'm not even convinced we such a thing as free will, just the illusion of it.

So, and I know some people will totally misinterpret what I'm saying here, but on a philosophical level I don't believe that serial killers really had any choice.

That belief is not the same thing as saying that as a society we should tolerate everything everybody does because they 'had no choice'.

One of the key things society can do to shape its environment and improve outcomes and behaviours is create incentives and disincentives.

While on a philosophical level I feel bad for the sort of twisted environment and brain chemistry that would lead to an individual to commit crimes that lead them to a miserable life in jail, I still feel it is essential that this punishment exists and it is a behaviour we stigmatise.

So, you are right in what I think you're getting at - we do need to encourage parents to do a better job and not give them a free pass on their failings. The thing is we need to not expect this to happen by magic. If you don't do anything to change the environment, you're not going to see see any change.

I personally believe education is the solution to most of the worlds problems, and that investment in it should be a priority. I also think we need to be quite radical and creative in how we do it.

I see the obvious benefit to kids who go to grammar schools that otherwise would have been stuck in a crappy state school, but I reject the idea of placing so much emphasis on a child's path at the age of 11.

One of the ideas I had was that each area should have a 'super school' at secondary level. This would be a dynamic schooling system that had a high number of academically gifted students. The strict rule would be that every single student in the region would spend at least 1 year there, and that every student at the school would spend at least 1 year in a state school. This would be determined by a factor of student performance, and an element of chance determined by a secret (but independently operated) computer algorithm. This element of chance also makes it hard for potential employers to apply too much prestige and bias and instead focus on the thing that matters most - the skills obtained and their suitability. The super schools can also do all kinds of dynamic outreach, and create opportunities for all students to benefit from their programming and continue to be affiliated and connected.

I think it would be good for kids to experience different learning environments, and meeting kids from other schools and forming those friendships would be a good life experience.

Another key area I'd have is creating training on how to be a good parent, make it universal, and make it mandatory for parents who are failing in certain areas or in some sort of at risk welfare status. I think it should teach the skills of why its important to teach children to work hard, how to teach children how to learn, teaching children to make the most of school and not be disruptive, and also teaching parents to be aspirational for what their own children can achieve - and to celebrate with the right support that their kids may be able to exceed them in areas of schooling they failed. Really try and shift the mindset.

I don't think victim culture is the solution. But I don't think blame culture achieves anything at all either and probably just exasperates the problem.

[WanChaiMiller]

Anyone who wants to ban threads like this from Millermad is bonkers.

Absolutely facinating to read and brilliant stuff. Thank you.

[John2]

Largely agree John. There is a huge advantages attending a public school such as Eton as we all know, but how do you undo the class system? dont think you can.

I think class is a bit of a red herring, I think better education in grass roots schools and a completely different mind set is needed. My brother paid for his own education, his drive was incredible born in a 3k council house hes a multi-millionaire but his class is unchanged.

We cant all be billionaires, there will always be rich and poor (unless we have a different type of system and then we will all be poor) We do need to address the taxes the super rich pay, said it a million times not just in business, people like Lewis Hamilton buying his helicopter in the Isle of Man to save £250m in VAT, the wealthy Russians who have managed to get here via golden passports and the companies who manage to dodge £bns

We are a product of environment. Maybe the UK is so entrenched in the class system that we can't undo it. I think we'll struggle in my lifetime, but my god we can at least try. You seem to agree there with your comments on education and mindset, we probably think the same thing under a different name.

Funnily enough I once went on a ski trip with a fellow who was in Prince Harry's class at Eton.

Nobody is arguing we should all be billionaires, just that we should aspire to have nobody living in (relative) poverty. Pointing out things used to be even worse in the past isn't helpful.

[crashbang]

Largely agree John. There is a huge advantages attending a public school such as Eton as we all know, but how do you undo the class system? dont think you can.

I think class is a bit of a red herring, I think better education in grass roots schools and a completely different mind set is needed. My brother paid for his own education, his drive was incredible born in a 3k council house hes a multi-millionaire but his class is unchanged.

We cant all be billionaires, there will always be rich and poor (unless we have a different type of system and then we will all be poor) We do need to address the taxes the super rich pay, said it a million times not just in business, people like Lewis Hamilton buying his helicopter in the Isle of Man to save £250m in VAT, the wealthy Russians who have managed to get here via golden passports and the companies who manage to dodge £bns

250m in vat?
How much was the chopper?