Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Britian's poorest going hungry: Are we heading the same way?

Options
1…1415171920

Comments

  • Options
    #482
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Robroy36 wrote: »
    Rich people and normal run of the mill middle class families.
    Oh right, so not everybody then. So you agree access to private education is dependent on parental income. Thanks for agreeing on the main issue.


  • Options
    #483
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    VinLieger wrote: »
    You have some almighty chip on your shoulder
    Big effin' deal. You can either refute what I've posted or lamely resort to ad hominems like this. Yawn.


  • Options
    #484
    VinLieger
    Registered Users Posts: 17,799 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    Oh right, so not everybody then. So you agree access to private education is dependent on parental income. Thanks for agreeing on the main issue.

    Of course it depends on parental income but thats not the argument, the argument is the parental income directly influences a child's future income which is garbage. There are countless other factors to weigh into the equation.


  • Options
    #485
    hmmm
    Registered Users Posts: 11,205 ✭✭✭✭hmmm


    Wamsung wrote: »
    Work ethic, diet, open mindedness, intelligence etc are more important in my opinion that whether your parents are rich or not.
    And if you do have kids or parents who share those qualities, you'll find an awful lot of Irish society will try and drag you down. God forbid that some parents want to get the best education for their kids that they can, and are willing to sacrifice to pay for it - some chain smoking, pyjama wearing, Sinn Fein voting, lifetime doler will be out demanding that you pay even more in tax as a consequence.


  • Options
    #486
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    jank wrote: »
    People who go to specialist international musical schools more often than not have parents who themselves earn their living from music. I suppose having passed on these musical genes the kids have an unearned advantage.... The only way to stop this of course is ....gene therapy or some whacky idea.
    Even if you haven't noticed, you have just agreed it's nurture not genetics or "breeding".


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #487
    Robroy36
    Registered Users Posts: 224 ✭✭Robroy36


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    Admit it. 3k was the cheapest you could find and now you're deliberately pretending it's the average.
    Now for your next trick, use your accountancy wizardry to magic up 3-6k per year out of a 10k dole.

    3k-ish is what I have heard for the likes of CUS, Blackrock, Belvedere and Michael's. I know Clongows is higher but AFIK that is boarding only so obviously going to be higher.

    I know the protestant ones are higher again but not sure on what their ball park is.

    The dole is a (admittedly overly generous) subsistence payment. I don't expect you to be able to run a car while on it let alone afford private education for one or two children. I never said private was affordable for people on the dole anyhow.


  • Options
    #488
    jackofalltrades
    Registered Users Posts: 3,251 ✭✭✭jackofalltrades


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    Unless you are claiming grinds and more expensive private education confer no advantage, this post is a complete waste of electrons.
    According to this study private schools don't seem to confer any advantage at all.
    This is the really interesting bit from the conclusion.
    We applied the new approach for comparing the proficiency in mathematics of children aged 15 between public and private schools in Ireland.
    Our analysis shows that although the average score of pupils in the sample from private schools is significantly higher than the average score of pupils from public schools, the picture is reversed once the effect of the school selection is accounted for properly.

    The easiest way to remove the advantage of grinds is the increase the quality of teachers in our schools.
    Although it seems politically a lot easier to attack a small number of private schools, rather than taking on the larger and politically stronger teachers unions.


  • Options
    #489
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    Let's make grinds illegal, the natural way to bring equality to education. All comrades are allowed 28 hours of teaching from a approved state instructor. Any more, parents will have to face the education equality tribunal.

    Spend money on fags and pay TV, nothing... Spend money on your kids education... How dare they!!


  • Options
    #490
    Robroy36
    Registered Users Posts: 224 ✭✭Robroy36


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    Oh right, so not everybody then. So you agree access to private education is dependent on parental income. Thanks for agreeing on the main issue.

    It is of course! I don't know many children who take in 3k + a year and fewer still who would decide to spend it on school fees even if they did!


  • Options
    #491
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Wamsung wrote: »
    Not having to work gives more time to study, so what, you aren't entitled to free money so you don'the have to work. People are entitled to give their children money if they so wish.

    Some people are better looking than others too, do you have a problem with that? It's called life, most people realise these things when they become adults. The average Irish student has the means to get a first in college if they study hard enough and have the intelligence.
    Again irrelevant to the likelihood of them getting to and doing better in uni being connected to parental salary.
    Anecdotes are comedy gold as ever.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #492
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Robroy36 wrote: »
    It is of course! I don't know many children who take in 3k + a year and fewer still who would decide to spend it on school fees even if they did!
    I said parental income quite clearly. What imaginary post are you basing this substitue for a logical rebuttal on?


  • Options
    #493
    Robroy36
    Registered Users Posts: 224 ✭✭Robroy36


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    I said parental income quite clearly. What imaginary post are you basing this substitue for a logical rebuttal on?

    What is your problem? Access to private education is dependent of your parents earning a wage, the level of wage required will depend on their outgoings such as mortgage/rent, food, heating ect. It seems we both agree on this. You seem to believe that only the "rich" can afford private education - I corrected you that it was not only the "rich" but also normal middle class families. You then asked me if people on the dole could afford it to which I replied no.


  • Options
    #494
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    jank wrote: »
    Let's make grinds illegal, the natural way to bring equality to education. All comrades are allowed 28 hours of teaching from a approved state instructor. Any more, parents will have to face the education equality tribunal.

    Spend money on fags and pay TV, nothing... Spend money on your kids education... How dare they!!
    Also not in any way a rebuttal han children's educational and eventual income isn't related to parental income.
    Top marks for shoehorning your standard anti-communist ranting in to this mess of a post mind you.


  • Options
    #495
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Robroy36 wrote: »
    What is your problem? Access to private education is dependent of your parents earning a wage, the level of wage required will depend on their outgoings such as mortgage/rent, food, heating ect. It seems with both agree on this. You seem to believe that only the "rich" can afford private education - I corrected you that it was not only the "rich" but also normal middle class families. You then asked me if people on the dole could afford it to which I replied no.
    So you are agreeing quality of education is related to parental income. You seem to be apoplectic with rage that it has turned out you agree with me. Cognitive dissonance much?


  • Options
    #496
    hmmm
    Registered Users Posts: 11,205 ✭✭✭✭hmmm


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    So you are agreeing quality of education is related to parental income.
    "Dole" is not "income", it's supposed to be a temporary support while you look for a job. Of course the dole is not sufficient for private education, it was never meant to be.


  • Options
    #497
    Robroy36
    Registered Users Posts: 224 ✭✭Robroy36


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    So you are agreeing quality of education is related to parental income. You seem to be apoplectic with rage that it has turned out you agree with me. Cognitive dissonance much?

    Are you confusing me with another poster?

    I absolutely believe that private education is superior to public education although a lot of people will try to tell you otherwise. It is on a par in importance with providing (private) health insurance for your children.

    Both of which are dependent on you earning something close to or above the standard industrial wage, depending on how many children you have. You do not have to be a business tycoon to afford both.


  • Options
    #498
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    hmmm wrote: »
    "Dole" is not "income", it's supposed to be a temporary support while you look for a job. Of course the dole is not sufficient for private education, it was never meant to be.
    Dole isn't salary but it most certainly is income.
    Dictionary required chez hmmm stat.


  • Options
    #499
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Robroy36 wrote: »
    Both of which are dependent on you earning something close to or above the standard industrial wage, depending on how many children you have. You do not have to be a business tycoon to afford both.
    So dependent on parental income. Glad we (still) agree.


  • Options
    #500
    Robroy36
    Registered Users Posts: 224 ✭✭Robroy36


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    So dependent on parental income. Glad we (still) agree.

    I have never disagreed with you on that point.

    We disagree on the level of income required.


  • Options
    #501
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Robroy36 wrote: »
    I have never disagreed with you on that point.

    We disagree on the level of income required.
    Can I assume we agree if you are on the dole you are unlikely to send your kids to a private school no matter how much you are interested in their education?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #502
    Robroy36
    Registered Users Posts: 224 ✭✭Robroy36


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    Can I assume we agree if you are on the dole you are unlikely to send your kids to a private school no matter how much you are interested in their education?

    If you stay on the dole for the entire time (circa 14 years) your children are in primary or secondary education then no, you are never going to send them to a private school.

    What is your point?


  • Options
    #503
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 29,027 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    jackofalltrades wrote: »
    According to this study private schools don't seem to confer any advantage at all.
    This is the really interesting bit from the conclusion.


    The easiest way to remove the advantage of grinds is the increase the quality of teachers in our schools.
    Although it seems politically a lot easier to attack a small number of private schools, rather than taking on the larger and politically stronger teachers unions.
    the teaching unions don't need to be taken on hence they aren't. more teachers are needed and unless the government pay for it that isn't going to happen.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #504
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Robroy36 wrote: »
    If you stay on the dole for the entire time (circa 14 years) your children are in primary or secondary education then no, you are never going to send them to a private school.

    What is your point?
    Yeah, because that's the one and only scenario where you wouldn't be able to afford a private education. Sure.
    Education correlates with parental income. This is part of why offspring income correlates so well with parental income.
    Doesn't suit the right wing captain of my fate narrative mind you.


  • Options
    #505
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    jank wrote: »
    People who go to specialist international musical schools more often than not have parents who themselves earn their living from music. I suppose having passed on these musical genes the kids have an unearned advantage.... The only way to stop this of course is ....gene therapy or some whacky idea.

    Children being born with a talent and children going to a better school irregardless of talent are two very different things.


  • Options
    #506
    Robroy36
    Registered Users Posts: 224 ✭✭Robroy36


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    Yeah, because that's the one and only scenario where you wouldn't be able to afford a private education. Sure.

    It is one of them. There are others however the reality is, for most families, a choice is taken to go on a holiday or buy a new car rather than invest in their children. The narrative that it is only for the "rich" suits these people down to the ground.
    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    Education correlates with parental income. This is part of why offspring income correlates so well with parental income.
    Doesn't suit the right wing captain of my fate narrative mind you.

    It is one correlating factor but I don't think it is the primary factor. The parents work ethic, social class and individual priorities all play a role as well.


  • Options
    #507
    AlexisM
    Registered Users Posts: 250 ✭✭AlexisM


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    I succeeded but as I am a capitalist at heart and cannot stand those given unearned advantage.
    You cannot stand those given unearned advantage? So you prejudge people and despise them because they were given unearned advantage? Regardless of whether they are the nicest, most humble, socially aware person, you cannot stand them?

    And what is your definition of 'unearned advantage'? Is it similar to the socialists definition of 'the rich' as someone who earns more than you? Having an interested, intelligent parent is an unearned advantage (a massive one) - but is that 'lucky accident of birth' more noble somehow than money?


  • Options
    #508
    Robroy36
    Registered Users Posts: 224 ✭✭Robroy36


    AlexisM wrote: »

    And what is your definition of 'unearned advantage'? Is it similar to the socialists definition of 'the rich' as someone who earns more than you? Having an interested, intelligent parent is an unearned advantage (a massive one) - but is that 'lucky accident of birth' more noble somehow than money?

    Apples and Oranges.

    We have zero control over who gets born where but we do have (limited) control over how the state spends our money.


  • Options
    #509
    VinLieger
    Registered Users Posts: 17,799 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    I succeeded but as I am a capitalist at heart and cannot stand those given unearned advantage. It's uncompetitive. You mention background. If education were equal why would background be important? Were you given unearned advantage or did you earn it through scholarship?

    So you are admitting to hating yourself then? You have enumerous unearned advantges simply because you were born a white person in Ireland instead of for example a black person in somalia


  • Options
    #510
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    VinLieger wrote: »
    So you are admitting to hating yourself then? You have enumerous unearned advantges simply because you were born a white person in Ireland instead of for example a black person in somalia
    Whether he hates himself or not is irrelevant to the point he's made though. He can be in a good position thanks to a system he doesn't agree with. Is that confusing?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #511
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    AlexisM wrote: »
    You cannot stand those given unearned advantage? So you prejudge people and despise them because they were given unearned advantage? Regardless of whether they are the nicest, most humble, socially aware person, you cannot stand them?

    And what is your definition of 'unearned advantage'? Is it similar to the socialists definition of 'the rich' as someone who earns more than you? Having an interested, intelligent parent is an unearned advantage (a massive one) - but is that 'lucky accident of birth' more noble somehow than money?

    Hang on where do I judge them? I go to UCD so I'm friends with half of them. They're some of the nicest people I have met and have helped me when times were bad. I don't judge their parents either who were only doing what's best for their child. I do judge the system and those who defend the system.


Advertisement