homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Ship's Locker   » Limbo   » Purgatory: Welfarism (Page 4)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Purgatory: Welfarism
ianjmatt
Shipmate
# 5683

 - Posted      Profile for ianjmatt   Author's homepage   Email ianjmatt   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The problem is that all your solutions suggest statist intervention into the freedom of self-determination of people. Restriction where they can go to school (such as banning independent schools) is one such example.

The truth is that if someone is motivated and has the ability they can overcome their situation. I come from working class stock - my father was an unskilled labourer. My parents divorced when I was 10, and my stepfather was slightly better off, but getting richer. He grew up on a council estate and didn't see the benefit of education beyond 16. We never got on and I was forced out at 17 with two 'O' levels and lived in a squat in Manchester.

However, I eventually sorted myself out. Studied at evening class, took various mundane jobs and applied for the sort of job I might have wanted.

I suppose I consider myself middle-class now in terms of values: education, long-term planning, the arts etc but I know that it is only because I chose to adopt those values myself in spite of my background which was a disadvantage.

My point is that I got no support, help or motivation from my home life. That is not the death knell of ambition for anyone unless they allow it to be.

--------------------
You might want to visit my blog:
http://lostintheheartofsomewhere.blogspot.com

But maybe not

Posts: 676 | From: Shropshire | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748

 - Posted      Profile for Doc Tor     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The two obvious and entirely unworkable solutions are these: inheritance tax at 100%, and close fee-paying schools.

Since that will never happen (in a democracy, at least), those who seek a better deal for less advantaged kids have to engage in some fairly radical social engineering simply to get anywhere at all.

--------------------
Forward the New Republic

Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748

 - Posted      Profile for Doc Tor     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:
My point is that I got no support, help or motivation from my home life. That is not the death knell of ambition for anyone unless they allow it to be.

No one here is arguing that it is.

But your story proves our, not your, point. That if you'd been supported in your ambitions by a system that recognised your potential and helped you financially, you wouldn't have ended up homeless and you'd have got your qualifications and decent job sooner.

We don't live in ancient Sparta, where every day must be a struggle in order to weed out the weaklings. Fighting for everything you have sounds noble, but it isn't. The rich certainly don't do it.

--------------------
Forward the New Republic

Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Moth

Shipmate
# 2589

 - Posted      Profile for Moth     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:

The truth is that if someone is motivated and has the ability they can overcome their situation.

I deny that that is the truth. I contend that for every story like yours, there are hundreds where the the disadvantaged person stays in poverty. We don't like that story so much, so we don't tell it.

I think that that the plural of anecdote is not data, and that if the statistcs show what I think they show, you are wrong. Motivation and ability are not enough - and in any case, why should the poor have to show exceptional ability and motivation, over and above that of their richer peers, to succeed?

--------------------
"There are governments that burn books, and then there are those that sell the libraries and shut the universities to anyone who can't pay for a key." Laurie Penny.

Posts: 3446 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460

 - Posted      Profile for ken     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
The two obvious and entirely unworkable solutions are these: inheritance tax at 100%, and close fee-paying schools.

No need for super-high inheritance tax at all. A land tax at the normal rate of income tax on imputed rent from land would do much of the job.

Just as ordinary income gets an allowance, so have one for land. Also another allowanec for main residence.

And charge little or nothing for standing woodland, uncultivatable hill country or marshland, and land in national parks or nature reserves & so on that is farmed by systems agreed with the managers of the reserves (nice and green).

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
ianjmatt
Shipmate
# 5683

 - Posted      Profile for ianjmatt   Author's homepage   Email ianjmatt   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Moth:
Motivation and ability are not enough - and in any case, why should the poor have to show exceptional ability and motivation, over and above that of their richer peers, to succeed?

Because that is just life. I don't resent it, it is just a fact.

We should fight for a fairer society, absolutely. But we shouldn't penalise parents who can make good provision for their children in the misguided idea of fairness.

--------------------
You might want to visit my blog:
http://lostintheheartofsomewhere.blogspot.com

But maybe not

Posts: 676 | From: Shropshire | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748

 - Posted      Profile for Doc Tor     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:
We should fight for a fairer society, absolutely. But we shouldn't penalise parents who can make good provision for their children in the misguided idea of fairness.

So you're saying it's fine for parents to buy their kids privilege, but not for the State to buy it for kids whose parents can't afford it.

--------------------
Forward the New Republic

Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460

 - Posted      Profile for ken     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
What Moth said.
quote:
Originally posted by Moth:
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:

The truth is that if someone is motivated and has the ability they can overcome their situation.

I deny that that is the truth. I contend that for every story like yours, there are hundreds where the the disadvantaged person stays in poverty. We don't like that story so much, so we don't tell it.

Surely the whole thing is obvious? Can we really be disagreeing on this?

As the world as a whole has been slowly getting richer of the past few centuries, most people are a bit better off than their parents used to be at tyhe same age. But some people end up much poorer than they started, and some much richer. We'd all agree on that, yes?

Someone who was born well-off is more likely to prosper, and less likely to be poor, than someone who was born poor. But its not guaranteed, its just a probability. Obviously true, yes?

Someone who is well supported by family and friends is more likely to prosper, and less likely to be poor, than someone who is isolated and alone. But its not guaranteed, its just a probability. Obviously true, yes?

Someone who has great natural abilities is more likely to prosper, and less likely to be poor, than someone who has many disabilities. But its not guaranteed, its just a probability. Obviously true, yes?

Someone who is married and supported by their spouse is more likely to prosper, and less likely to be poor, than someone who is single, or whose spouse does not help them. But its not guaranteed, its just a probability. Obviously true, yes?

Someone who is lucky is more likely to prosper, and less likely to be poor, than someone who is unlucky. But its not guaranteed, its just a probability. Obviously true, yes?

Someone who is hard-working is more likely to prosper, and less likely to be poor, than someone who is lazy. But its not guaranteed, its just a probability. Obviously true, yes?

Someone who is well-educated is more likely to prosper, and less likely to be poor, than someone who undeducated. But its not guaranteed, its just a probability. Obviously true, yes?

Someone who is intelligent is more likely to prosper, and less likely to be poor, than someone who is stupid. But its not guaranteed, its just a probability. Obviously true, yes?

Does anyone disagree with any of those statements?

So how can anyone serously say things like "if someone is motivated and has the ability they can overcome their situation" as if it was a general rule that applies everywhere?

What Moth says is obviously true.

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
ianjmatt
Shipmate
# 5683

 - Posted      Profile for ianjmatt   Author's homepage   Email ianjmatt   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:
We should fight for a fairer society, absolutely. But we shouldn't penalise parents who can make good provision for their children in the misguided idea of fairness.

So you're saying it's fine for parents to buy their kids privilege, but not for the State to buy it for kids whose parents can't afford it.
No - that wasn't what I said. It isn't right to penalise parents who can make that provision in a search for a good society. In the end, the state can never be a good parent - it can only hope to mitigate the effects of poor parenting.

--------------------
You might want to visit my blog:
http://lostintheheartofsomewhere.blogspot.com

But maybe not

Posts: 676 | From: Shropshire | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748

 - Posted      Profile for Doc Tor     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:
We should fight for a fairer society, absolutely. But we shouldn't penalise parents who can make good provision for their children in the misguided idea of fairness.

So you're saying it's fine for parents to buy their kids privilege, but not for the State to buy it for kids whose parents can't afford it.
No - that wasn't what I said. It isn't right to penalise parents who can make that provision in a search for a good society. In the end, the state can never be a good parent - it can only hope to mitigate the effects of poor parenting.
You're subtly changing your argument here. Parents aren't buying privilege for their children for the good of society: they're buying privilege for the good of themselves and their kids - it's almost an entirely selfish act.

And the corollary is obvious: that if I buy privilege for my kids, I'm doing it so they'll be higher up the socio-economic ladder and wield more power than your kids.

If we don't somehow mitigate the privilege that money buys, that's the way it's going to stay - something you say you don't want to happen. [Confused]

--------------------
Forward the New Republic

Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
ianjmatt
Shipmate
# 5683

 - Posted      Profile for ianjmatt   Author's homepage   Email ianjmatt   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
When the comprehensive system was proposed in the 1964 Labour manifesto they promised that every school would be as good as the Grammar Schools. That was a laudable aim and shows what would be the ideal.

Not reducing the opportunity money brings, but raising everyone up to the same level as the best. I have never seen it happen (and the comprehensive system certainly didn't deliver what Labour promised it would), but that is surely the aim!

--------------------
You might want to visit my blog:
http://lostintheheartofsomewhere.blogspot.com

But maybe not

Posts: 676 | From: Shropshire | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Marvin the Martian

Interplanetary
# 4360

 - Posted      Profile for Marvin the Martian     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Moth:
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:
So we change one bad system for another one. What is the point in that?

Well, you suggest a better one! I'm not entirely convinced by my own solutions either, but since I think that the stranglehold that the middle classes have on opportunities is the problem, forcibly breaking that hold in some way is the solution. I'm probably not going far enough, actually, as I haven't suggested banning independent schools, for example.
Make the bad schools better while letting the good schools stay that way. Make things more equal by dragging the bottom up, not dragging the top down.

quote:
If, like Marvin, you think that the problem is the poor themselves, my solution obviously won't work.
You seem to think that everyone who currently occupies the lower rungs of the social ladder would be perfectly able to slot into any other situation if only they'd been given the breaks. But that ignores the millions who genuinely don't care what they do, the parents who just go out drinking every night rather than looking after their kids, or who are abusive, or who are just so feckless that their kids never even get told that opportunity exists. Evening out opportunities won't help these people. Managing school admissions by a lottery system won't sober up an alcoholic parent, and I am firmly of the belief that parenting is the single most significant factor in anyone's success (or lack thereof).

--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar

Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748

 - Posted      Profile for Doc Tor     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
You seem to think that everyone who currently occupies the lower rungs of the social ladder would be perfectly able to slot into any other situation if only they'd been given the breaks.

While you seem to think that everyone who currently occupies the higher rungs of the social ladder got there because of their own individual talent and drive.

Bollocks. Moth is right in far more cases than you are.

--------------------
Forward the New Republic

Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Moth

Shipmate
# 2589

 - Posted      Profile for Moth     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I am firmly of the belief that parenting is the single most significant factor in anyone's success (or lack thereof).

Then provide a link to the research that backs you up!

--------------------
"There are governments that burn books, and then there are those that sell the libraries and shut the universities to anyone who can't pay for a key." Laurie Penny.

Posts: 3446 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Marvin the Martian

Interplanetary
# 4360

 - Posted      Profile for Marvin the Martian     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Just like you, all I can do is demonstrate correllation. We're not arguing about the correllation, we're arguing about the things that cause that correllation.

--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar

Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
So how can anyone serously say things like "if someone is motivated and has the ability they can overcome their situation" as if it was a general rule that applies everywhere?

What one can say, on the other hand, is that some people who are motivated and have ability overcome some aspects of their situation to greater or lesser extents.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Moth

Shipmate
# 2589

 - Posted      Profile for Moth     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Just like you, all I can do is demonstrate correllation. We're not arguing about the correllation, we're arguing about the things that cause that correllation.

No, I have gone a lot further than you - I have quoted published research about the factors that correllate with lack of success in life. One of those is indeed parenting. It is not the only one. You persist in claiming that parenting is the only or main factor in success without once offering any evidence whatsoever that you are correct.

Let's try this another way: Parent A and Parent B are both excellent parents, utterly devoted to the success of their children. Parent A has a good job and is able to provide their chidren with a private education at a top school, riding lessons, music lessons, exciting and educational hoildays abroad and a fund to pay fees at any university in the world. Parent B is poorly paid and can afford none of those things, though they do their best to take an interest in education and to help their child succeed.

Which child, assuming equal intelligence and motivation, is more likely to succeed?

--------------------
"There are governments that burn books, and then there are those that sell the libraries and shut the universities to anyone who can't pay for a key." Laurie Penny.

Posts: 3446 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Marvin the Martian

Interplanetary
# 4360

 - Posted      Profile for Marvin the Martian     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Moth:
Which child, assuming equal intelligence and motivation, is more likely to succeed?

The way I see it, both kids still have to go to school and get the grades. I don't know about any other universities, but the one I work for only accepts students based on academic achievement - no amount of extra fees paid will get anyone in if they haven't got the grades. If other universities will, they are in the wrong.

My limited understanding of employment law is that nepotism and the old school tie shouldn't be factors in hiring (or promoting) - I realise that's hard to enforce but it's worth working at.

Riding/music lessons are a red herring, as they're just hobbies. In many ways holidays are the same - it's nice to see the world, but very few job interviews will depend on how many countries you've seen.

Of course, it also depends on how you define success. If you define it as someone making it into the top 10% of earners in the country then obviously 90% of people won't be successful. But if you define it as an incremental increase in living standards with each generation - being successful compared to where you started from, rather than compared to everyone else - it's not as difficult. I feel successful because I have a good job that I don't hate, and that pays enough to cover all the bills with a little left over for a rainy day. By the standards you appear to be using I'm not a success, because I'm not a judge or top solicitor or member of parliament.

--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar

Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713

 - Posted      Profile for Sioni Sais   Email Sioni Sais   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:
When the comprehensive system was proposed in the 1964 Labour manifesto they promised that every school would be as good as the Grammar Schools. That was a laudable aim and shows what would be the ideal.

Not reducing the opportunity money brings, but raising everyone up to the same level as the best. I have never seen it happen (and the comprehensive system certainly didn't deliver what Labour promised it would), but that is surely the aim!

Had the per capita funding for comprehensives matched that of the grammar schools, that would have been possible. But the pot wasn't made much larger and many secondary moderns were little better than the 'Board Schools' they purported to replace. I was lucky enough to pass the 11+ and the first form I was in had 28 pupils. Mrs Sioni's by contrast had 39 and they had to share desks and textbooks.

A heck of a lot more kids now get to do the higher tier GCSE's which are comparable to GCE's and the latter were, as near as dammit, restricted to grammar school pupils; in some cases exam boards refused Sec Mods the opportunity!

btw, the Attlee government really missed a trick when it didn't bring the Public Schools into the national education system [Biased]

--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"

(Paul Sinha, BBC)

Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Riding/music lessons are a red herring, as they're just hobbies. In many ways holidays are the same - it's nice to see the world, but very few job interviews will depend on how many countries you've seen.

I think what this leaves out is that many university interviews ask for students interested in the rest of the world and life. Students who can talk fluently about outside interests, riding, sport and music are more likely to be admitted.

The other important factor is that these outside interests develop the student's faculty to think. For instance, studying music is an exercise in intellectual development.

(BTW I think your definition of success question is a good one. We all have our own personal definitions, but it would be a better world if our personal definitions were less constrained by circumstance of our birth).

[ 18. November 2010, 11:35: Message edited by: mdijon ]

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
ianjmatt
Shipmate
# 5683

 - Posted      Profile for ianjmatt   Author's homepage   Email ianjmatt   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Moth:

Let's try this another way: Parent A and Parent B are both excellent parents, utterly devoted to the success of their children. Parent A has a good job and is able to provide their chidren with a private education at a top school, riding lessons, music lessons, exciting and educational hoildays abroad and a fund to pay fees at any university in the world. Parent B is poorly paid and can afford none of those things, though they do their best to take an interest in education and to help their child succeed.

Which child, assuming equal intelligence and motivation, is more likely to succeed?

Obviously the child of Parent A. However, how do you mitigate that? By restricting the freedom of Parent A to make those choices for their child? Or by providing the structures to help the child of Parent B, which can only augment the parent's desire, not replace it?

Part of the problem I have seen is that too much public policy has been about stopping the parents from helping their children succeed (attacking private education and so-called 'pushy' middle-class parents) rather than looking at education, society and communities and asking difficult questions.


quote:
Originally posted by mdijon

I think what this leaves out is that many university interviews ask for students interested in the rest of the world and life. Students who can talk fluently about outside interests, riding, sport and music are more likely to be admitted.

The other important factor is that these outside interests develop the student's faculty to think. For instance, studying music is an exercise in intellectual development.

So what are you saying? That we stop parents providing these things? That we should weigh the balance against well-rounded and articulate children? I'm not sure what the solution is you are proposing.

--------------------
You might want to visit my blog:
http://lostintheheartofsomewhere.blogspot.com

But maybe not

Posts: 676 | From: Shropshire | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:
So what are you saying?...I'm not sure what the solution is you are proposing.

I was saying what I thought the facts were. I wasn't proposing a solution.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
ianjmatt
Shipmate
# 5683

 - Posted      Profile for ianjmatt   Author's homepage   Email ianjmatt   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:
So what are you saying?...I'm not sure what the solution is you are proposing.

I was saying what I thought the facts were. I wasn't proposing a solution.
So do you think there needs to be a solution?
Posts: 676 | From: Shropshire | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Yes, but that's not the same as believing that I have the solution.

I'm pretty sure part of it is the welfare state, but it's clear to me that the welfare state can also be part of the problem in certain circumstances. Utopia would be if we could provide child B with child A's opportunity. What do we do when we can't do that?

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Moth

Shipmate
# 2589

 - Posted      Profile for Moth     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:
Part of the problem I have seen is that too much public policy has been about stopping the parents from helping their children succeed (attacking private education and so-called 'pushy' middle-class parents) rather than looking at education, society and communities and asking difficult questions.


Actually, I dispute that entirely. Both under the Tories and Labour, the only actual policies put into place have been to try to improve the lot of the poor to bring them up to the standards of the rich. For example, the last government never closed public schools, or even took away their charitable status. Its main policies were 'SureStart' providing early nursery school place for deprived children and league tables for state schools to try to improve them. Neither party is ever going to really take away the advantages of the successful, and I can see that there are great disadvantages in doing so.

It seems to me that the problem is the old one of equal access. When women didn't have equal access to the professions, they couldn't succeed in them. Now they do have equal access, they do succeed, a fact which contradicts the reason often given for their lack of success before - that they were somehow 'unfitted' for such work.

I think what is going on at present is a direct corollary. It suits us to believe that the poor are 'unfitted' to succeed, when what they lack is equal access. How we fix the problem is a thorny question. My suggestions above were my best guess based on what I think to be the reasons for the problem. They would shake things up and lead to fairer access to good schools at least in the state sector. I am, however, open to persuasion that it would cause so much disruption as to be unworkable.

--------------------
"There are governments that burn books, and then there are those that sell the libraries and shut the universities to anyone who can't pay for a key." Laurie Penny.

Posts: 3446 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
dyfrig
Blue Scarfed Menace
# 15

 - Posted      Profile for dyfrig   Email dyfrig   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Moth:
Both under the Tories and Labour, the only actual policies put into place have been to try to improve the lot of the poor to bring them up to the standards of the rich.

You have put your finger on the nail and hit the nub of something I was finding hard to articulate. The policies of the last Labour government was never to "bring everybody down to the same level" - such rhetoric is at least 20 years out of date. It's not just fighting the last war - it's fighting the one before that.

--------------------
"He was wrong in the long run, but then, who isn't?" - Tony Judt

Posts: 6917 | From: pob dydd Iau, am hanner dydd | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Matt Black

Shipmate
# 2210

 - Posted      Profile for Matt Black   Email Matt Black   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Moth:
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:

The truth is that if someone is motivated and has the ability they can overcome their situation.

I deny that that is the truth. I contend that for every story like yours, there are hundreds where the the disadvantaged person stays in poverty. We don't like that story so much, so we don't tell it.


We should tell that story and asked why those people don't succeed where others do, all other things being equal. The fact that this happens may suggest something about those people that is not a lot to do with 'equality of opportunity'.

--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)

Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Moth

Shipmate
# 2589

 - Posted      Profile for Moth     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
quote:
Originally posted by Moth:
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:

The truth is that if someone is motivated and has the ability they can overcome their situation.

I deny that that is the truth. I contend that for every story like yours, there are hundreds where the the disadvantaged person stays in poverty. We don't like that story so much, so we don't tell it.


We should tell that story and asked why those people don't succeed where others do, all other things being equal. The fact that this happens may suggest something about those people that is not a lot to do with 'equality of opportunity'.
Now I'm really confused. If all other things were equal, then there would be equality of opportunity. What I'm saying is that all other things are not equal.

If what you mean is that of two people both in difficult circumstances, one may succeed and the other not, then it might be down to hundreds of factors - health, luck, character etc. What I am complaining about is that someone with less money and power etc has to try much harder to succeed than someone with those assets, and that is not fair. In a ideal world, a bright child from a poor home would have an equal chance of being a doctor with one from a wealthy home. At the present, all the research shows that is not the case.

--------------------
"There are governments that burn books, and then there are those that sell the libraries and shut the universities to anyone who can't pay for a key." Laurie Penny.

Posts: 3446 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Moth:
How we fix the problem is a thorny question.... I am, however, open to persuasion that it would cause so much disruption as to be unworkable.

I completely agree with you on the bit that dyfrig quoted. For instance, Labour's foundation 2 funding has allowed many middle class parents to top up what they pay to independent schools to benefit their children. Not that there's anything wrong with that provided it is proportionate to spending elsewhere in the education system, but it counters the claim that Labour was about the politics of envy and dragging the middle class down.

However, on what to do about it I'm pretty clear in my mind that anything that seeks to reduce independent provision is a really bad idea. Apart from the civil liberties issues, I suspect the overall effect will be to reduce the average quality of education rather than send the money and facilities into the state sector.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Matt Black

Shipmate
# 2210

 - Posted      Profile for Matt Black   Email Matt Black   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Moth:
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
quote:
Originally posted by Moth:
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:

The truth is that if someone is motivated and has the ability they can overcome their situation.

I deny that that is the truth. I contend that for every story like yours, there are hundreds where the the disadvantaged person stays in poverty. We don't like that story so much, so we don't tell it.


We should tell that story and asked why those people don't succeed where others do, all other things being equal. The fact that this happens may suggest something about those people that is not a lot to do with 'equality of opportunity'.
Now I'm really confused. If all other things were equal, then there would be equality of opportunity. What I'm saying is that all other things are not equal.


Exactly. Which means that if two people are dealt, shall we say, an 'unlucky hand' in terms of their circumstances, and one succeeds and the other doesn't, then we should be asking ourself why the second person hasn't succeeded, rather than necessarily blaming inequality of opportunity.

--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)

Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
quote:
Originally posted by Moth:
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
quote:
Originally posted by Moth:
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:

The truth is that if someone is motivated and has the ability they can overcome their situation.

I deny that that is the truth. I contend that for every story like yours, there are hundreds where the the disadvantaged person stays in poverty. We don't like that story so much, so we don't tell it.


We should tell that story and asked why those people don't succeed where others do, all other things being equal. The fact that this happens may suggest something about those people that is not a lot to do with 'equality of opportunity'.
Now I'm really confused. If all other things were equal, then there would be equality of opportunity. What I'm saying is that all other things are not equal.


Exactly. Which means that if two people are dealt, shall we say, an 'unlucky hand' in terms of their circumstances, and one succeeds and the other doesn't, then we should be asking ourself why the second person hasn't succeeded, rather than necessarily blaming inequality of opportunity.
um... how do you say "exactly" and then go on to completely deny what you are supposedly agreeing with?

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Matt Black

Shipmate
# 2210

 - Posted      Profile for Matt Black   Email Matt Black   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I meant 'all other things being equal' between the two of them, not the two of them and the rest.

--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)

Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
That doesn't really seem logical, Matt. If out of 100 subjects under condition A, 50% achieve outcome x, but of 100 subjects under condition B, 10% achieve outcome x it isn't sensible to ask what is wrong with the missing 40% under condition B. You might ask what was so special about the 10%, on the other hand.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Matt Black

Shipmate
# 2210

 - Posted      Profile for Matt Black   Email Matt Black   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Maybe, but it's still worth looking at the differences between the 10% and 40% under B and seeing if lessons can be learned from that also rather than just blaming the differences between A and B.

--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)

Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The lessons run along the themes that some people are just very highly motivated, very intelligent, very lucky, or all three, and will withstand anything. I'd have thought that in terms of government policy examining those individual differences is less important than comparing conditions A and B.

On the other hand, I accept that for an individual it may be more profitable to think about what other individuals in condition B are doing that works, as one's ability to influence government policy is limited.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748

 - Posted      Profile for Doc Tor     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Maybe, but it's still worth looking at the differences between the 10% and 40% under B and seeing if lessons can be learned from that also rather than just blaming the differences between A and B.

Okay, so after turning a machine gun on group A, who are all wearing body armour, 50% are still alive. Shoot at group B, who aren't, and only 10% survive.

Your conclusion: those in group B who dodge better, live. I think I see a flaw in your argument.

--------------------
Forward the New Republic

Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Marvin the Martian

Interplanetary
# 4360

 - Posted      Profile for Marvin the Martian     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Moth:
It seems to me that the problem is the old one of equal access. When women didn't have equal access to the professions, they couldn't succeed in them. Now they do have equal access, they do succeed, a fact which contradicts the reason often given for their lack of success before - that they were somehow 'unfitted' for such work.

I think what is going on at present is a direct corollary.

Unless the professions have a "no poor people" rule, and are enforcing it, there's not a direct corollary at all. If it was that simple, we could put laws in place that say universities and companies cannot take social class or individual wealth into account when recruiting, and problem solved.

quote:
It suits us to believe that the poor are 'unfitted' to succeed, when what they lack is equal access.
I don't think poor kids are 'unfitted' at all - on the contrary I think that many have promise that quite simply isn't allowed to shine through due to entrenched attitudes. I mean, you yourself have pointed out that some poor parents don't value education, and thus teach their kids not to value it - that's exactly the sort of thing I'm talking about! What could those kids become if they were being taught to value education, that it was something that could really do wonders for them if they put the effort in?

quote:
How we fix the problem is a thorny question. My suggestions above were my best guess based on what I think to be the reasons for the problem.
My suggestion - to make the bad schools better, so that top education is available for all - would go a fair way to fixing the problem as well, wouldn't it?

--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar

Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
That is what many successive administrations have claimed as their policy. But social mobility doesn't seem any higher for it.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Marvin the Martian

Interplanetary
# 4360

 - Posted      Profile for Marvin the Martian     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Okay, so after turning a machine gun on group A, who are all wearing body armour, 50% are still alive. Shoot at group B, who aren't, and only 10% survive.

The solution is to buy more body armour, not to take some of the body armour off group A and give it to group B.

--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar

Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Marvin the Martian

Interplanetary
# 4360

 - Posted      Profile for Marvin the Martian     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
That is what many successive administrations have claimed as their policy. But social mobility doesn't seem any higher for it.

Have the schools actually improved though? People can claim to be enacting policies all they like, but if they don't actually do them it doesn't mean the policies don't work.

--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar

Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Imaginary Friend

Real to you
# 186

 - Posted      Profile for Imaginary Friend   Email Imaginary Friend   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
That is what many successive administrations have claimed as their policy. But social mobility doesn't seem any higher for it.

Have the schools actually improved though?
Exam grades have gone up. [Two face]

--------------------
"We had a good team on paper. Unfortunately, the game was played on grass."
Brian Clough

Posts: 9455 | From: Left a bit... Right a bit... | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I don't know. Maybe they have improved but not as much as the general standard, and so the poor are still being left behind. Yes, it's about implementation.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Dinghy Sailor

Ship's Jibsheet
# 8507

 - Posted      Profile for Dinghy Sailor     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Riding/music lessons are a red herring, as they're just hobbies. In many ways holidays are the same - it's nice to see the world, but very few job interviews will depend on how many countries you've seen.

I think what this leaves out is that many university interviews ask for students interested in the rest of the world and life.
I don't know what you studied, all of mine mainly involved me answering maths questions.
Posts: 2821 | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748

 - Posted      Profile for Doc Tor     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Okay, so after turning a machine gun on group A, who are all wearing body armour, 50% are still alive. Shoot at group B, who aren't, and only 10% survive.

The solution is to buy more body armour, not to take some of the body armour off group A and give it to group B.
Duh, yes.

At least you managed to state the obvious, rather than Matt's response, "Let's look at the difference between the 10% who lived and the 90% who died", which was worthy of only derision.

--------------------
Forward the New Republic

Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Marvin the Martian

Interplanetary
# 4360

 - Posted      Profile for Marvin the Martian     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
At least you managed to state the obvious

Funny how it's obvious when applied to machine guns and body armour, but when applied to education people suddenly start thinking that removing one person's opportunity in order to give it to someone else is a good and desirable thing...

--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar

Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dinghy Sailor:
I don't know what you studied, all of mine mainly involved me answering maths questions.

At undergraduate level? That surprises me. Medicine certainly isn't like that, and nor is biology.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748

 - Posted      Profile for Doc Tor     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
At least you managed to state the obvious

Funny how it's obvious when applied to machine guns and body armour, but when applied to education people suddenly start thinking that removing one person's opportunity in order to give it to someone else is a good and desirable thing...
You love this strawman, don't you? Let's run with it, then.

Why have group A got all the body armour? I bet it's not because they're more deserving of it than group B.

--------------------
Forward the New Republic

Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think it depends what is meant by "removing their body armour". If one means ensuring that government resource is supplied equally to all, where previously the government favoured one group, then I'm all for it. If it means banning independent schools to ensure the teaching resources are more widely distributed then that's not so great.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Dinghy Sailor

Ship's Jibsheet
# 8507

 - Posted      Profile for Dinghy Sailor     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Dinghy Sailor:
I don't know what you studied, all of mine mainly involved me answering maths questions.

At undergraduate level? That surprises me. Medicine certainly isn't like that, and nor is biology.
At both undergrad and postgrad level.

--------------------
Preach Christ, because this old humanity has used up all hopes and expectations, but in Christ hope lives and remains.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Posts: 2821 | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Marvin the Martian

Interplanetary
# 4360

 - Posted      Profile for Marvin the Martian     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
I think it depends what is meant by "removing their body armour". If one means ensuring that government resource is supplied equally to all, where previously the government favoured one group, then I'm all for it. If it means banning independent schools to ensure the teaching resources are more widely distributed then that's not so great.

Exactly. There must be a way to increase the opportunities available to the poor without decreasing the opportunities available to everyone else.

For instance, the practice of the middle classes moving into a good school's catchment area is frequently held up as a way that the poor are denied opportunity. But if all schools were good then it wouldn't matter where people lived. Is the solution to prevent people from moving to good catchment areas (say, by bringing in a lottery system for school admissions) or to make it so that they don't have to in the first place?

--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar

Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools