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

VinLieger · 31-12-2014 7:13pm

Dan_Solo wrote: »

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?

No its just evidence of someone not accepting the world is unfair sometimes and trying to compensate for all the uncontrollable inequalities as to where people are born and who they are born to may be a socialists wet dream nonetheless its insanity

steddyeddy · 31-12-2014 7:15pm

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

Was I competing with a black person in Somali for college places? I don't care if I got less holidays, toys or whatever as a child but there is no justification for one child receiving a better education than another when both children are competing for the same place in college.

Tony EH · 31-12-2014 7:15pm

yipeeeee wrote: »

That's not true.

There was a percentage still unemployed.

A tiny, tiny percentage. Many of which actually cannot work, or were between jobs.

Tony EH · 31-12-2014 7:28pm

yipeeeee wrote: »

Benefits and entitlements, two of the worst words this country has gotten used
to since the recession.

If someone has paid taxes into a welfare system for 15 years they are ENTITLED to that BENEFIT when their job goes belly up and they cannot find a new one.

It's very simple.

Dan_Solo · 31-12-2014 7:31pm

VinLieger wrote: »

No its just evidence of someone not accepting the world is unfair sometimes and trying to compensate for all the uncontrollable inequalities as to where people are born and who they are born to may be a socialists wet dream nonetheless its insanity

What a rambling unintelligible load of twaddle.

Dan_Solo · 31-12-2014 7:34pm

Wamsung wrote: »

No school is going to provide exactly the same level of education as another.

What about children that are just naturally more intelligent, should we hit them over the head a few times to reduce their intelligence so there is no unfair advantage?

Nobody has said people aren't different. Except you. Right here.
Income inequality is connected to educational inequality is connected to lack of social mobility. Outside of Thatcher, Reagan and adherents these things are ubiquitously accepted.

yipeeeee · 31-12-2014 7:41pm

Tony EH wrote: »

A tiny, tiny percentage. Many of which actually cannot work, or were between jobs.

Yes and something has happened in between now and then to turn this nation into benefit and entitlement obsessed.

The system is been screwed more than ever.

ireland.man · 31-12-2014 7:45pm

yipeeeee wrote: »

Yes and something has happened in between now and then to turn this nation into benefit and entitlement obsessed.

The system is been screwed more than ever.

Yeah, he's right. Unemployment has shot up for some reason and my money is on the destruction of fairy mounds..

yipeeeee · 31-12-2014 7:48pm

ireland.man wrote: »

Yeah, he's right. Unemployment has shot up for some reason and my money is on the destruction of fairy mounds..

Of course unemployment has shot up.

But so has the opportunity for people to screw the system and not bother with any effort to get back employed.

I have seen it first hand on many examples.

jackofalltrades · 31-12-2014 7:55pm

end of the road wrote: »

the teaching unions don't need to be taken on hence they aren't.

Yes they do, if we want any kind of effective performance management system to be brought in.

Dan_Solo · 31-12-2014 7:55pm

Wamsung wrote: »

Moustaches are connected to heart disease.

Oh that nonsense. You didn't explain what private schools and grinds are for then if there's no connection between education spend and education achievement. Countries that spend more on education have better education. Wouldn't that be random too according to your reality bending no-causation theory?
Go on. Wheel out your lame moustache gotcha again despite it being already beaten to a bloody pulp.

Tony EH · 31-12-2014 7:59pm

yipeeeee wrote: »

Yes and something has happened in between now and then to turn this nation into benefit and entitlement obsessed.

The system is been screwed more than ever.

It may have escaped your extremely limited attention, but we have been in one of the worst recessions this country has experienced.

:rolleyes:

and the only one's "obsessed" with "benefits" and "entitlements" are the likes of you and your fellow bitter "scrap the dole" comrades.

steddyeddy · 31-12-2014 8:01pm

Wamsung wrote: »

No school is going to provide exactly the same level of education as another.

What about children that are just naturally more intelligent, should we hit them over the head a few times to reduce their intelligence so there is no unfair advantage?

That's my whole point!! I want the children who are naturally intelligent to succeed. There are very intelligent people who didn't get into college the first time because of the school they went to and the fact that they were competing with someone who went to a better school. The person who went to a better school might not have the same level of intelligence but will still have a better chance.

AlexisM · 31-12-2014 8:51pm

steddyeddy wrote: »

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

They're your friends and some of the nicest people you've met but you can't stand them? How does that work? Maybe you have a different definition of not being able to stand someone...

steddyeddy wrote: »

I succeeded but as I am a capitalist at heart and cannot stand those given unearned advantage.

"I cannot stand those given unearned advantage." "My friends were given unearned advantage." "Therefore I cannot stand my friends." Seems a logical extrapolation. No?

Gael23 · 31-12-2014 8:54pm

Quite possibly.
I was in a supermarket over christmas and overheard staff airing grievances over the amount of meat that went to waste as obviously everyone eats turkey & ham so other meats don't sell as well.
The main reason for unhappiness is that management won't donate this meat to homeless hostels for fear of being sued in case some of it is gone bad and makes someone sick.

Dan_Solo · 31-12-2014 8:58pm

AlexisM wrote: »

I cannot stand those given unearned advantage." "My friends were given unearned advantage." "Therefore I cannot stand my friends." Seems a logical extrapolation. No?

Actually... no.
I hate your rubbish theory but I don't hate you.
See? :-)

steddyeddy · 31-12-2014 9:04pm

AlexisM wrote: »

They're your friends and some of the nicest people you've met but you can't stand them? How does that work? Maybe you have a different definition of not being able to stand someone..."I cannot stand those given unearned advantage." "My friends were given unearned advantage." "Therefore I cannot stand my friends." Seems a logical extrapolation. No?

That was badly phrased. I meant I cannot stand the fact that some people are given an unearned advantage over others.

Dan_Solo · 31-12-2014 9:11pm

Wamsung wrote: »

Private schools and grinds are for students to educate themselves.

Paid for by, um, er, parents who can afford them and not by parents who are too poor.
Why bother implying there was "holes" in my connecting education spend with education quality when you now are explicitly agreeing there is a connection?

Dan_Solo · 31-12-2014 9:52pm

Wamsung wrote: »

I've never denied that private schools are better, though it'seems not necessarily something I believe to be true either, I'don't like to see studies on the subject.

I can't follow this sentence.

Wamsung wrote: »

Ultimately a pupil can only get so much help from throwing money at the problem, they have to learn the material and sit the exam themselves. The resources are there for the vast majority of students to succeed.

But they CAN get money thrown at the problem only IF the money is available to throw. On 10k dole a year this isn't going to happen.
Hence a causative mechanism linking parental salary and child education.

shruikan2553 · 31-12-2014 10:14pm

We've gone from:

smcgiff wrote: »

Rates for younger unemployed were reduced and for good reason.

Because young people should be able to get jobs

smcgiff wrote: »

And before someone says there are no jobs out there... Go into your local retail shop or hotel etc. see how many of them are foreign workers. Do you honestly think they'd not rather have Irish workers in these customer facing roles all things being equal.

When you actually mean is they should be reliant on social welfare for 12 months so that the likes of hotels and shops can get free labour for 40 hours a week for 9 months.

Some how they would rather have Irish workers as long as they aren't paying for them. I must be missing something here. It sounds like there is no real reason to reduce welfare for everyone under 26 while letting someone who is 30 stay on it for 5 years at the full rate.

Dan_Solo · 31-12-2014 10:51pm

shruikan2553 wrote: »

Because young people should be able to get jobs

It makes no sense from the start. If a 50 year old can't get a job, what makes anybody think an 18 year old can so a dole cut will force him to?

smcgiff · 31-12-2014 11:06pm

So comrades, am I correct in thinking that no one can go to private school unless everybody can go to private school?

Is that the same for other services like health insurance?

I love the selective arguments, no comrade has mentioned the freely accessible Gael Colaiste that are heading up the results leagues.

Dan_Solo · 31-12-2014 11:21pm

smcgiff wrote: »

So comrades

Mr Self Described Genius Debater at work here lads. Stand back!

smcgiff · 31-12-2014 11:35pm

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Mr Self Described Genius Debater at work here lads. Stand back!

Doing my best to ignore you, but this sums up your level of contribution beautifully. You've a massive cheap on your shoulder since I picked you up on your post to me.

I'll abandon boards.ie forever if you can find out where I claimed I was a genius debater. Or is this yet another BS post of yours that totally wastes readers' time.

steddyeddy · 31-12-2014 11:36pm

smcgiff wrote: »

So comrades, am I correct in thinking that no one can go to private school unless everybody can go to private school?

Is that the same for other services like health insurance?

I love the selective arguments, no comrade has mentioned the freely accessible Gael Colaiste that are heading up the results leagues.

Put it this way, If the test is standardised and the conditions are highly variable the test is invalid. The leaving cert determines who is the best for college. The variables involved should be intelligence, hard work, suitability, all factors which are down to the individual.

On this thread we posters talk about how hard the parents of the students worked in relation to education. I don't see posters mentioning that such and such a student is bright, hard working and a natural scientist or whatever. We see people saying his parents can't afford this because they're on the dole or his parents can afford this because they're not.

Now let me ask this. Why should the education of a child suffer in relation to another child because his parents didn't work hard or were on the dole or whatever? My mother didn't earn a lot of money and couldn't afford to send me to a great school. She worked and didn't smoke or drink by the way. Yet I was always interested in science and reading about quantum mechanics in secondary school. By the the rationale of some posters here another child who was born into a richer family deserved a better education than I did. An education which could have seen him/her enter into science ahead of me even though I had a natural aptitude for it.

Dan_Solo · 31-12-2014 11:48pm

smcgiff wrote: »

Doing my best to ignore you, but this sums up your level of contribution beautifully. You've a massive cheap on your shoulder since I picked you up on your post to me.

And spewing out "comrades" at the start of your latest nonsensical rant sums up what you've got to offer too, doesn't it?

smcgiff wrote: »

I'll abandon boards.ie forever if you can find out where I claimed I was a genius debater. Or is this yet another BS post of yours that totally wastes readers' time.

Oh dear. Here you are saying what a great debater you are. So great you can't even remember what you've already posted.

smcgiff wrote: »

Check out my posts on this thread alone. I'm well able to debate.

Bye then.

smcgiff · 31-12-2014 11:58pm

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Oh dear. Here you are saying what a great debater you are. So great you can't even remember what you've already posted.Bye then.

So, yeah BS. You're a clown of the highest order as proved by your posts.

steddyeddy · 01-01-2015 12:02am

Guys it's New Year's Eve

stop fighting and hug

smcgiff · 01-01-2015 12:04am

steddyeddy wrote: »

Put it this way, If the test is standardised and the conditions are highly variable the test is invalid. The leaving cert determines who is the best for college. The variables involved should be intelligence, hard work, suitability, all factors which are down to the individual.

On this thread we posters talk about how hard the parents of the students worked in relation to education. I don't see posters mentioning that such and such a student is bright, hard working and a natural scientist or whatever. We see people saying his parents can't afford this because they're on the dole or his parents can afford this because they're not.

Now let me ask this. Why should the education of a child suffer in relation to another child because his parents didn't work hard or were on the dole or whatever? My mother didn't earn a lot of money and couldn't afford to send me to a great school. She worked and didn't smoke or drink by the way. Yet I was always interested in science and reading about quantum mechanics in secondary school. By the the rationale of some posters here another child who was born into a richer family deserved a better education than I did. An education which could have seen him/her enter into science ahead of me even though I had a natural aptitude for it.

But you're advantaged by natural ability. Many students that require grinds do so for basic understanding, and bring them up to a level where they can keep up in school. Should these children remain left behind?

Dan_Solo · 01-01-2015 12:10am

smcgiff wrote: »

But you're advantaged by natural ability. Many students that require grinds do so for basic understanding, and bring them up to a level where they can keep up in school. Should these children remain left behind?

And if their parents can't afford them they don't get them.
Hence, yet again demonstrating how parental income affects child education quality.
At last something coherent, but you're arguing my side of this argument for some bizarre reason.

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

Comments