Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

The UK is "deeply elitist" do you agree?



Doc Lynam

I hate the Daily Mail
Jun 19, 2011
7,355
The Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission study found small elites, educated at independent schools and Oxbridge, still dominate top roles.

71% of senior judges
62% of senior armed forces officers
55% of permanent secretaries (the most senior civil servants)
53% of senior diplomats.

35% of the England, Scotland and Wales rugby teams and 33% of the England cricket team also went to private schools.

In politics, half the House of Lords attended independent schools, along with 36% of the cabinet, 33% of MPs and 22% of the shadow cabinet.

Whilst only 7% of the population have attended private schools.

Figures for top people who went to Oxford and Cambridge paint a similar picture.

Some 75% of senior judges, 59% of the Cabinet, 57% of permanent secretaries, 50% of diplomats, 47% of newspaper columnists, 38% of the House of Lords, 33% of the shadow cabinet and 24% of MPs hold Oxbridge degrees.

In contrast, less than 1% of the whole population are Oxbridge graduates while 62% did not attend university.

The report describes the figures as "elitism so stark that it could be called social engineering".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-28953881
 
Last edited:




KingstonSeagull

New member
May 1, 2013
2,185
Shoreditch
As an old harrovian this may be coming from a biased opinion however, from experiencing this education first hand I do not believe that pupils of these schools get a evine right to a better life I just feel the education provided and the sports facilities provided cater to excellence. I have also been educated for a brief while at a state comprehensive and this only confirmed my views that state comprehensives are leaps and bounds behind the standards of private schools in the UK.(from my experience this may be different in other schools)
 


mikeyjh

Well-known member
Dec 17, 2008
4,607
Llanymawddwy
Yes, is there any plausible debate about it?!?

The numbers for politicians is of particular concern. 59% of the cabinet coming from 1 of 2 universities is ridiculous.
 


yxee

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2011
2,521
Manchester
It's almost as if they've found a connection between a man's career and the quality of his education.

Hard hitting journalism.
 


Doc Lynam

I hate the Daily Mail
Jun 19, 2011
7,355
It's almost as if they've found a connection between a man's career and the quality of his education.

Hard hitting journalism.

I think it goes a bit deeper then that; ive seen examples of people being hired over other because there "one of there own."
 




sahel

Active member
Jan 24, 2014
225
As an old harrovian this may be coming from a biased opinion however, from experiencing this education first hand I do not believe that pupils of these schools get a evine right to a better life I just feel the education provided and the sports facilities provided cater to excellence. I have also been educated for a brief while at a state comprehensive and this only confirmed my views that state comprehensives are leaps and bounds behind the standards of private schools in the UK.(from my experience this may be different in other schools)

Public schools were established to help the poor. Then at some stage in the 19th century they were hijacked by the aristocracy. Since then they have been a vehicle for the rich and powerful to maintain their privileges and power. They are incredibly successful in doing that. And as a final irony they get all the tax advantages of being charities! Charities for God's sake! I don't believe in banning things but there is absolutely no reason that the ordinary taxpayer should be subsidising public schools to the tune of £100m a year that VAT exemption costs. And universities like Oxford and Cambridge should lose any state funding (I don't know how much they get) unless they reduce the 50% of places that go to public school educated students. This should be reduced to about 7% which is the proportion of children that go to public schools. Where is the Labour Party when you need it?
 
















User removed 4

New member
May 9, 2008
13,331
Haywards Heath
Public schools were established to help the poor. Then at some stage in the 19th century they were hijacked by the aristocracy. Since then they have been a vehicle for the rich and powerful to maintain their privileges and power. They are incredibly successful in doing that. And as a final irony they get all the tax advantages of being charities! Charities for God's sake! I don't believe in banning things but there is absolutely no reason that the ordinary taxpayer should be subsidising public schools to the tune of £100m a year that VAT exemption costs. And universities like Oxford and Cambridge should lose any state funding (I don't know how much they get) unless they reduce the 50% of places that go to public school educated students. This should be reduced to about 7% which is the proportion of children that go to public schools. Where is the Labour Party when you need it?
The parents that send their kids to private school still pay taxes yes ? They don't receive a rebate because their child/ren aren't using state education facilities , correct ? Then they're not being subsidised by ordinary taxpayers are they ? As for your comments about state funding for Oxbridge , all that would do would be to lower the standards.
 








narly101

Well-known member
Feb 16, 2009
2,683
London
I think it paints a picture that indicates get an education and you'll be far more likely to get a decent job. Unsurprising.
 


1234andcounting

Well-known member
Mar 31, 2008
1,609
Well your privileged education obviously equipped you with a profound insight, didn't it? Bread roll fight, anyone?
 








1234andcounting

Well-known member
Mar 31, 2008
1,609
The parents that send their kids to private school still pay taxes yes ? They don't receive a rebate because their child/ren aren't using state education facilities , correct ? Then they're not being subsidised by ordinary taxpayers are they ? As for your comments about state funding for Oxbridge , all that would do would be to lower the standards.

Not true. Public schools, bizarrely, are considered charitable institutions, even Eton. Therefore they receive the same taxation privileges that other charities do.
 


sahel

Active member
Jan 24, 2014
225
The parents that send their kids to private school still pay taxes yes ? They don't receive a rebate because their child/ren aren't using state education facilities , correct ? Then they're not being subsidised by ordinary taxpayers are they ? As for your comments about state funding for Oxbridge , all that would do would be to lower the standards.

Lower standards? Do you think public school kids are more intelligent than state school children? Do you not think it might be something to do with the training they get at these public schools? Did you know that state educated kids do better than public school kids once they get to university? Could that be something to do with the spoon feeding that the public schools provide? Are you aware of the number of places at Oxbridge reserved for people educated at particular schools?If we want elite universities then they should be educating a genuine elite.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here