richardg
Admonishtrator
Almost a stand-up.I think you need reminding what education for a child should be about, this well known lecture is well worth watching, it’s also very funny.
Almost a stand-up.I think you need reminding what education for a child should be about, this well known lecture is well worth watching, it’s also very funny.
Thanks. It was touch and go whether I would achieve it, so your reassurance is gratifying.Was it your intention to come across as a complete cvnt with that post, if so congratulations.
Considering most people here don't think private schools should be abolished, I do not envisage there will be too much support for you on this issue!Thanks. It was touch and go whether I would achieve it, so your reassurance is gratifying.
Two points. Boris Johnson. And of those who were critical of the post, how many have privately educated their kids? Perhaps we can have a separate thread solely dedicated to willy-waving their achievements?
I'm not sure they should be abolished, and one mans elevating the talentless to the semblance of talented is another mans miraculous achieving of potential against all the odds.Considering most people here don't think private schools should be abolished, I do not envisage there will be too much support for you on this issue!
Yes I have put three children through private.
Child 1. State til 8. Then Hockey scholarship, Clifton College resulting in England U21s hockey team. Now tax ayingb NHS physio Cardiff
Child 2. State til 12. Bullying, exclusion. Underperformance. Grandparents plus me made choice to cash in pensions, savings (all tax paid). To put her private. Result. First from Liverpool. Masters from Glasgow (3d visualisation and antatomy). Now: just started technician role with Academy of surgeons and Glasgow Uni.
Child 3. Middling academically median ergo lost in state til year 5. Removed and placed independent with music bursary and family funds. Now thriving.
When you actually have kids, you will (generally) do what you can to give them best chance.
It’s not some dinky left/right idealism politics game.
Actually it seems more thick skinned than thin, it more “Oi, I gave my children a very nice breakfast in the conservatory overlooking the estate this morning, why can’t everybody?”One obstacle to solving problems of inequality and deprivation is always going to be thin-skinned people taking things personally. "We should eliminate hunger! No child should be going to school hungry!" "Oi I gave my children breakfast this morning are you calling me a c___?"
Actually it seems more thick skinned than thin, it more “Oi, I gave my children a very nice breakfast in the conservatory overlooking the estate this morning, why can’t everybody?”
Two points. Boris Johnson. And of those who were critical of the post, how many have privately educated their kids? Perhaps we can have a separate thread solely dedicated to willy-waving their achievements?
In all your posts in this thread you come over as mean, vindictive,spiteful and resentful.
Ask yourself this question.
Why is it in a country as affluent as this that only people who are able pay can get a decent education for their children and secondly why is it the more you pay the better that 'education' is?
Because if it really was just about education then why make it so difficult for the vast majority to have access to a proper one.
I'm not knocking the whole comprehensive school system because I'm sure that there are many great schools and thousands of fantastic teachers out there but why is it the exception rather than the rule?
That only works if person B had not said something in context before. But in most cases on pfm, someone says something, then someone else makes a slur, using generalising sentence structures as defence.One obstacle to solving problems of inequality and deprivation is always going to be thin-skinned people taking things personally. "We should eliminate hunger! No child should be going to school hungry!" "Oi I gave my children breakfast this morning are you calling me a c___?"
But the private schools have much higher costs... they are attempting ( in their eyes ) to turn out a superior product. If you remove charitable status and then make them take 50% state school children and only pay them the state school rate per child they will go bankrupt.But I think you know that. If you want rid of them then just ban them.
Tug that forelock, know your place, respect your betters. How dare the common people question why a school funded and attended by the progeny of the wealthy should enjoy charitable status, there's privilege and then there's taking the piss( oh and cheating by sitting easier A Levels....)
It's the ones that do fluffy stuff about the past that you need to look out for.
Boris - Classics
Michael - English Literature
Jacob - Classics
Daniel - History
And servants gonna serve!
Yes I have put three children through private.
Child 1. State til 8. Then Hockey scholarship, Clifton College resulting in England U21s hockey team. Now tax ayingb NHS physio Cardiff
Child 2. State til 12. Bullying, exclusion. Underperformance. Grandparents plus me made choice to cash in pensions, savings (all tax paid). To put her private. Result. First from Liverpool. Masters from Glasgow (3d visualisation and antatomy). Now: just started technician role with Academy of surgeons and Glasgow Uni.
Child 3. Middling academically median ergo lost in state til year 5. Removed and placed independent with music bursary and family funds. Now thriving.
When you actually have kids, you will (generally) do what you can to give them best chance.
It’s not some dinky left/right idealism politics game.