+ Visit West Bromwich Albion FC Mad for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 30 of 30

Thread: Starmer - What a Prick!

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,519
    Now I’m looking into this and it doesn’t take much to work out the reality of it all. Universities also pay VAT but depends on what it is? If this is the case.. then why shouldn’t these public schools pay VAT??

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    4,927
    I taught for thirty seven years is in a state comprehensive school but having said this, we sent both of our sons to a private school. My wife was also a teacher in the same school but we decided that, as both of our lads were typical boys and our eldest son especially could be easily influenced by the wrong element, we would pay for their education. After my parents passed away we were left their property and decided to use the money for the boys' education. It was the best decision we ever made. Both of them often thank us now as they loved every minute at the school and many of their best friends are ex-pupils who they are still in touch with on a regular basis. They have both turned out well and have good careers.
    I agree with those posters who were saddened by the demise of the state grammar schools, one of which I attended, as they gave an excellent education to everybody with ability and not just to those who could financially afford it. In my opinion, the problem with today's society is that we dumb down to the mediocre and don't encourage excellence. Nobody must feel to be a failure!

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,100
    Quote Originally Posted by baggieal View Post
    What about those that aren't loaded who scrimp and save and forego holidays and posh cars to send their kids to private schools to give them the best education? So to add 20% could result in another 3 grand a year! Surely it's more beneficial for the tax payer that more kids go to private schools!!! A state school place is not free as it's about 10 grand a year to the tax payer. Bit like the NHS - why would they want to reduce their appalling waiting lists when money who can't really afford it will pay for private operations or suffer?

    Are private schools better than state schools - well kids will have more opportunities in private schools and be usually with more academically selective kids as most good ones have hard entrance exams. Bit like kids who will thrive and play to a better standard in a good football team who are very selective of the players - kids will excel and be brought up to the same standard. Whereby if talented football kids go to a squad where it's just for fun and some can't kick a ball - they will generally not get better. That's obvious!

    Selective State Grammar Schools with the 11+ entrance exams should never have been abolished. Why should very clever kids be held back by kids who don't want to learn, have low IQ'S, or have problems. Still a few state grammar schools left and one near us! So many arguments by parents near us about the selective grammar school that's still going with the 11+ saying kids are cherry picked and weakening other schools. The arguments will always be from parents whose kids would never pass the entrance exam! Pure jealously!

    Competitiveness should be encouraged as it's a fact of life! I wish I had been many things but being honest with myself - I never had the grades!
    I get what you’re saying Al, but Starmer reckons £6m is lost taxation. So in a nutshell, the tax payer funds already privileged kids to become even more privileged. Feels like another example of what is wrong with society.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    6,300
    Quote Originally Posted by WBA1955 View Post
    A good education should be free to whoever wants one. Not everyone does.
    For years a good education was only available to those who have rich parents, it still is really, though as Al says parents work hard to get their kid's the best.
    Rich people don't want their kids mixing with your working class lot, they might pick up radical ideas, and heaven forbid these back street kid's might one day become politicians and have a say about how the country is run.
    The Army was another closed shop, it was hard for working classes to get commissions while daddy could buy little Nigel one.
    What I can't understand is why people jump on Labour politicians all the time, while continuing to vote Tory when they don't want the children of us scum mixing with theirs.
    I think that it's snobbery, people who come from council estates and make good then think they are Tory, but they will never be one of them, they might find a use for them as a golfers caddy.
    For what it's worth I have never lived in a council house on a council estate, but I have always had a sense of fair play and have never had a desire to tread on others to get another rung up the ladder.
    Well put Des.

    ”The system” is there to conserve classes, gaps and inequality, alas…

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    23,893
    Quote Originally Posted by SwedishBaggie View Post
    Well put Des.

    ”The system” is there to conserve classes, gaps and inequality, alas…
    Des, some of the biggest snobs I’ve ever known were living on council estates! 🤣

    Living in a council house does not preclude anyone from being “above” themselves and having an inflated opinion of their own self and their family.

    Some of the absolute worst were in the very lowest of middle class estates where I was brought up.

    A lot of these people had themselves risen from council estate backgrounds and suddenly acquired “airs and graces” in a “Mrs Bucket” fashion.

    Your far too “Upstairs, Downstairs” when you go in about this stuff, you seem to be completely oblivious to how preposterous a lot of people from working class backgrounds can actually be as characters.

    You’d have us all believe they are all “salt of the earth” and forced to tug on their forelock for their betters.

    It’s utter b o l l o c k s old mate.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2021
    Posts
    2,367
    I actually agree with Starmer in principle and this isn't the "politics of envy" that the Tories trot out as their usual defence to protect their own interests but rather a desire for a fairer society. That said, this principle would only work if there was a decent state education system available to all but the system is clearly broken at the moment as decades of underfunding and poor standards have taken their toll. Moreover, as others have said, if this measure was introduced now there may be plenty of parents who could no longer fund their children's private education and these children would then have to attend state schools instead which would increase the burden on the system in terms of numbers as well as costing the government more.

    Given the woeful situation that the state education system is in it is totally understandable that those who can afford to do so would opt to send their children to a public school in order for them to get the best education they could and-given that this then saves the state money-it is also understandable that they might expect at least some government help towards this. If their children don't get any money from the government for a state education, then why shouldn't some of this money still go towards a private education. I am also aware that many who send their children to private schools are not mega rich and so scrimp and save to do so.

    If there was, however, a decent state education available to all I do not think that either private or church schools should continue to get the help they do at present from the state and they are certainly not charities! Those wealthy enough to be able to continue sending their children to private schools could still do so-its their money so its up to them how they spend it and funding their children's education is more laudable than buying a bigger house or more expensive cars. That said, the private (public?) schools have a lot the answer for given the achievements of some of their products in the Tory party over recent years..

    As an aside, there are thousands of children-the majority with special needs-who are home schooled simply because the current state system is unable to meet their needs. At between £5-8K a year each this saves the government a shed load of money too. In our case, we had to take our youngest out of middle school quite early on. We got jack financial help from the state ( as it was "our choice" to take him out of mainstream school) and we lost our second income as my wife had to give up work to care/educate him. Like so many kids, he was not severe enough to be able to attend a local specialist school but not able to cope in mainstream ones. We got no support for years other than an annual visit by a lady from the LEA who was lovely but whose caseload was too massive for her to do much more than review his EHCP. The government published lots of nice soundbites around funding and support but it took us several years of fighting before the LEA agreed to fund a home tutor for him. He is now, belatedly, studying for his A-levels. I just mention this to point out that system-and government-are also failing thousands of children with special needs and their families.

    Although I do agree with Starmer in principle then, I also feel that such measures cannot be introduced until the state education system is fixed and this will take not only increased funding but also, I believe, a serious re-evaluation of its methods and aims. The performances of state schools vary enormously and for a variety of reasons (not least demographic ones) but I do tend to agree that recent years have also seen a degree of "dumbing down" and a lowering of the bar as they work from the common denominator. Certainly the blame cannot all be laid at the feet of the teachers though, many of whom work bloody hard in a too often thankless job made all the harder for them both by the system itself but also by an increasing number of parents who expect them to not only educate their children but to discipline them and "bring them up" for them too.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2021
    Posts
    2,367
    Quote Originally Posted by mickd1961 View Post
    Des, some of the biggest snobs I’ve ever known were living on council estates! ��

    Living in a council house does not preclude anyone from being “above” themselves and having an inflated opinion of their own self and their family.

    Some of the absolute worst were in the very lowest of middle class estates where I was brought up.

    A lot of these people had themselves risen from council estate backgrounds and suddenly acquired “airs and graces” in a “Mrs Bucket” fashion.

    Your far too “Upstairs, Downstairs” when you go in about this stuff, you seem to be completely oblivious to how preposterous a lot of people from working class backgrounds can actually be as characters.

    You’d have us all believe they are all “salt of the earth” and forced to tug on their forelock for their betters.

    It’s utter b o l l o c k s old mate.
    Always reminds me of the Stan and Pammie characters of Harry Enfield & Chums -"I am considerably richer than yow!" (if I was at all tech savvy Id post a clip)

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    10,652
    In recent years there have been far more children from less wealthy backgrounds that have been given places at public schools. Also, many public schools share their facilities with state schools and the general public. It must also be said that going to a public school does not necessarily mean that only Tory party members will be turned out. As has been said, what needs to happen is the raising of standards in state schools; the abolition (almost) of grammar schools was a disaster; great care should be taken when tinkering with the education system because the outcome could very well be worse than we have now and it should definitely not be used as a political football.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    12,089
    Quote Originally Posted by mickd1961 View Post
    Des, some of the biggest snobs I’ve ever known were living on council estates! 🤣

    Living in a council house does not preclude anyone from being “above” themselves and having an inflated opinion of their own self and their family.

    Some of the absolute worst were in the very lowest of middle class estates where I was brought up.

    A lot of these people had themselves risen from council estate backgrounds and suddenly acquired “airs and graces” in a “Mrs Bucket” fashion.

    Your far too “Upstairs, Downstairs” when you go in about this stuff, you seem to be completely oblivious to how preposterous a lot of people from working class backgrounds can actually be as characters.

    You’d have us all believe they are all “salt of the earth” and forced to tug on their forelock for their betters.

    It’s utter b o l l o c k s old mate.

    Totally agree Mick! Those who have always been loaded are not usually the biggest snobs. The worst snobs in my view are the so called scumbags done well ie footballers and those with nothing who all of a sudden are multi
    millionaires with the big I am! Money does not make you a better person though. If you were brought up without manners - without kindness and without
    compassion then you will always be a scumbag!

    The old saying too is usually accurate - a child is the product of a parent. Ask a teacher and they will confirm this.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Sep 2021
    Posts
    2,367
    Quote Originally Posted by kettering_baggie View Post
    In recent years there have been far more children from less wealthy backgrounds that have been given places at public schools. Also, many public schools share their facilities with state schools and the general public. It must also be said that going to a public school does not necessarily mean that only Tory party members will be turned out. As has been said, what needs to happen is the raising of standards in state schools; the abolition (almost) of grammar schools was a disaster; great care should be taken when tinkering with the education system because the outcome could very well be worse than we have now and it should definitely not be used as a political football.

    Certainly agree that great care needs to be taken as the education system has a massive impact on children and their future. Whilst I certainly understand why many be-moan the demise of the old state "grammar schools" the concept of streaming is not always straightforward though. Certainly it cannot be right that those with ability are held back by others less capable but a variety of factors feed into this including class sizes. On the other-hand, it is equally important that those less able or with specific learning difficulties are also fully supported.

    The old 11 plus was phased out partly due to criticism that this was too early an age to sort children's abilities out properly and was too much of an influence in determining an individual's future possibilities at this young age. IMHO the old Army tagline of "being the best you can be" might be a decent aim so that everybody-regardless of background-has the opportunity to realize their potential in whatever areas that may be but, again, several factors feed into this including the all important one of support from home.

    Some critics of streaming moan about "elite-ism" but whilst everyone is good at something, only a few can be top of the class at anything. We cannot all be great academics, physicians, footballers or musicians etc and to pretend otherwise is rubbish. What is important is that everyone should be given equal opportunities. Similarly, some people are academic whilst others are better at sports or music or art or working with their hands. These skills should all be valued and the system needs to be broad enough to support and encourage all of them as this can surely only be of benefit to society as a whole as well as the individuals concerned. As a society we need a whole range of skilled people whether that be in business, commerce, finance, science, manufacturing and industry or media and the arts or builders, sparkies, plasterers, plumbers, mechanics etc. The system needs to serve several purposes, including giving children a basic education (eg the 3 Rs), helping them to become good members of society with the life skills they will need ( eg encourage them to think for themselves, be thoughtful of others and take responsibility as well as more practical skills) and prepare them for life after school (whether that be work or further education). Its a big ask and so important that we get it right.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Forum Info

Footymad Forums offer you the chance to interact and discuss all things football with fellow fans from around the world, and share your views on footballing issues from the latest, breaking transfer rumours to the state of the game at international level and everything in between.

Whether your team is battling it out for the Premier League title or struggling for League survival, there's a forum for you!

Gooners, Mackems, Tractor Boys - you're all welcome, please just remember to respect the opinions of others.

Click here for a full list of the hundreds of forums available to you

The forums are free to join, although you must play fair and abide by the rules explained here, otherwise your ability to post may be temporarily or permanently revoked.

So what are you waiting for? Register now and join the debate!

(these forums are not actively moderated, so if you wish to report any comment made by another member please report it.)



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •