Well my social skills are gash. Its the South London in me.
Oh I see. So what you were doing was listing things that you weren’t included in your monthly costs, and then saying you couldn’t afford them, but that it was irrelevant anyway as you can’t drive, thus proving my original point that you don’t have to worry about paying for all that?
You can’t have it both ways, even though from your posting history you think you should be entitled to having it anyway you want it.
Is that because we’ve actually spent a lot of the evening agreeing on things… 
No.
We were talking about what was included in my hypothetical monthly costs if I moved out. I included food, rent, bills and phone, which got me down to a number around about £500 or so.
You then said that you set aside about the same amount as ‘disposable income’.
I then pointed out that this wasn’t an equal comparison as you obviously were subtracting far more than food, rent, bills and phone to get down to that number.
Hence, ‘Family’ and ‘Mortgage’ as well as ‘Car’.
But that would make your final comment irrelevant.
Either you need to take these into account or you don’t. If you don’t then I don’t get your point, we have the same disposable income, irrelevant to if I pay for a car etc out of non-disposable income. It shouldn’t matter to you. Hence, that mail looks like you’re complaining that you wouldn’t be able to pay for a car, mortgage, family out of that disposable income.
What I’m saying is that you’re changing the definition of ‘disposable income’ for you and for me and yet comparing it as if they’re equal.
The money you spend on your kids is ‘disposable income’ if we use that definition. You choose to have them and choose to spend money from the same pool of non-rent/bills/phone pool of money that you have access to etc.
Now if I included a gym membership in my monthly costs and dropped the 500 number to 450 would you shrug your shoulders and say ‘ah well’? No. You’d point out it was a luxury and not an essential.
Besides, what do I have to do to prove to you guys that I’m not complaining?
I’m hoping and aspiring to earn a little bit more, sure. And naturally by extension of that I’ll be disappointed not to achieve it as (in future), my low salary *would* preclude me from house/mortgage/car/family.
Literally don’t get how this is coming off as entitled or complaining. I’m not even making an effort to defend myself on this point - I’m genuinely clueless as to what the issue is.
Gym membership would come out of my disposable income though.
My point was you could afford to move out on your current salary, and have a pretty comfortable life. None of what you’ve said above is changing that opinion, as we essentially have the same disposable income after all our bills.
“Well, for a start, they can stop sneering at him. Second, they might realise that kids are more capable of being dicks than most, especially if they haven’t had too much in the way of direction in early life”.
Sure. No arguments there. In terms of sneering all I can possibly do is assure you that I’m not sneering at Billy in any way, shape or form. The guy had a horrendous upbringing that I wouldn’t wish on my worst enemy and I’m trying to articulate my concern and that I recognise the obstacles he faced in life.
“I’ve known people like Billy. Very few stay that way. If anything, they’re an illustration of how different people develop at different rates. You’re going to meet people later in life that unbeknownst to you, were a version of Billy in earlier life, and you probably won’t even know he was a Billy.”
Hope you’re right, but I’m just struggling to be convinced. The school he went to (Ernest Bevin), was a complete and utter shocker. Full of violence and gang crime and kids who had no aspirations beyond becoming gangsters and drug dealers. Anyone trying to become a doctor or a lawyer would be dismissed as a ‘neek’. The culture was a case of ‘be-the-bully-because-bullies-are-strong’. The idea of Billy having a ‘moment of wonder’ whilst sitting in an otherwise riotous physics classroom strikes me as unlikely.
“The other problem we’ve got is that you seem to be under the impression that it’s Billy or you. That time spent on him is time wasted on people that could really be doing something with themselves. Perhaps, in the under-resourced reality of education, there’s some truth to that, but there’s no reason for that to be the case. Is it Billy’s fault that there isn’t enough resource, that schools now operate under a targets-based regime, and that getting people like Billy over the line is seen as more important as getting already bright kids over the A* line?”
Not at all, I’m more than happy for more money to be spent on the ‘development schools’ or whatever you call them, rather than the grammar schools, which will do just fine with the boffins cramming their heads in books rather than ‘interactive learning hubs’ or whatever.
“Your life hasn’t been disadvantaged by it, and perhaps at some future point, when Billy’s a grandad and you’re a bigwig at KPMG”
Ha! N’yawww. You’re so sweet.
“There’s a potential connection that cuts right through any class crap”
Sure! Football, music…
“all because of comprehensive education.”
And that’s where we disagree mate. People of vastly different academic abilities coming together and having a connection because they both went to a comprehensive just doesn’t tally with anything I’ve heard or experienced personally in my life. In my experience and those of others who were smart but went to comps – it just fostered resentment.
“As I said before, our school had all kinds, and judging from the size of some of my classmates’ places, many of them could have gone private if they’d wanted to. Instead, their parents packed them off to a constantly merging comprehensive on the edge of the Flower Estates, for which they deserve a lot of credit.”
I envy you. Big time.
“There’s a secondary goal to comprehensives that is being entirely missed. Yes, we’re supposed to leave with GCSEs and A Levels, but you’re also supposed to leave knowing enough about life to survive. How’d you suggest a parent best does that with their eleven year old child? A single sex Poindexter echo chamber, or something a bit more comprehensive?”
Yeah funnily enough I went to an all-boys school (Sutton Grammar) – and we were talking about how single-sex schools aren’t an ideal environment. No argument there.
Right. Sounds like that’s the crux of the disagreement. Its an opinion on which I think we’ll just have to agree to differ. If I could move out and have a comfortable life, I would. Be more fun innit?
Anyway, hopefully I’ve at least made the point that people in favour of Grammar schools don’t necessarily not-give-a-shit about those who wouldn’t make it.
Cool, happy to leave it there. Maybe we can discuss it at the Europa meet ups.
1 Like
Suffice to say, when teachers, teaching unions and Ofsted are all on the same side and opposed to grammar schools…then you’ve probably fucked up.
Nothing like using anecdotal evidence to support the reintroduction of grammar schools. Meanwhile ignoring all the actual research and evidence. Who needs experts, eh?
4 Likes
You’re all wrong and wasting your time arguing about one shit system of education or another whereas you should be questioning what on earth is the purpose of the education system as implemented by the establishment. I highly recommend the book “a different kind of teacher” by John Taylor Gatto. Unfortunately he’s an American teacher in the American system and not everything he says directly translates to the UK system, but even so, I found an awful lot of what he had to say resonated with me. One of his main arguments centres on the idea that society was actually better educated 100+ years ago. He believes children should be spending less time in school and more time in their community getting a rounded education. Why do children spend so much time at school when there is evidence that children who spend less time at school actually do better in exams? That children should not be stratified into age groups. And segregated from their elders and families. That they should not be shuffling arbitrarily from classroom to classroom whenever a bell rings. The schooling system in his opinion is a means by which the the state rips children from their families, destroys the natural order of things and moulds the working clasd into their own subservient robots according to ideas developed by the central European ruling classes hundreds of years ago.
The interesting thing, the author was new York city or state teacher of the year on a number of occasions. Upon receiving his final award at the award ceremony he made a speech resigning from his post and lambasting the system he had spent his whole life working on. Seriously, really good book. I think he has a couple of others which i have been told might be even better.
Things that really fucks me off about school in England. School uniforms. WTF. I Saw pictures of my 2 year old nephew on Facebook the other day. First day of kindergarten wearing a fucking uniform. I saw another kid graduating from kindergarten with a head board and gown thing wtfucking fuck. England wtf.
4 Likes
Cool, cheers.
I know I’ve got a lot to learn and I’ve got a lot of respect for the posters on here - and I certainly wouldn’t be asking for advice if that’s wasn’t the case. If I come off as having a bit of an attitude that’s not my intention at all. See you at the meetup hopefully.
1 Like
At some point we relinquished our parental responsibility to educate and raise our children to the state and this is perhaps how a broken case like Billy comes into existence. The state simply is not a substitute for a loving parent. Reading this book and subsequently discussing it, is a great way to lose friends who are teachers or just about to send their kids to school btw.
Originally posted by @StickyWhiteDovePiss
At some point we relinquished our parental responsibility to educate and raise our children to the state and this is perhaps how a broken case like Billy comes into existence. The state simply is not a substitute for a loving parent. Reading this book and subsequently discussing it, is a great way to lose friends who are teachers or just about to send their kids to school btw.
Why would it be? As a teacher I want what is best for my students (it’s why I teach after all) if there is evidence based research that suggests what he is saying is true and, most importantly, economically feasible then it would be an interesting read.
I believe the author does his best to research and cite evidence for his arguments within the book where appropriate, but it’s not an academic publication and I’d be lying if I had checked the veracity of all his claims. It’s fundamentally an opinion piece from a teacher who has spent decades working in the the US education system. I believe some of his opinions are somewhat controversial within the educational research community.
The reason a teacher might not like it, is that the book essentially makes them out to be unwitting tools of an overbearing state who are unintentionally acting to the detriment of the children they work with and society as a whole, and that the role they play in society could actually be blamed for much of modern life’s ills.
Strangely enough (in light of the recent topic of this thread), after a gap of well over 40 years, I’ve recently caught up with a couple of my old secondary school colleagues, both of whom were like Billy, insomuch as they both had had, shall we say, disadvantaged upbringings, struggled to find a relevance to their school life, and spent a lot of time punching people.
It transpired that both of them had turned their lives around after a spell of vocational training at Borstals (present day, youth custody centres); one had become a very successful professional photographer, the other a very skilled plasterer. These are examples that illustrate that Pap is correct when he says people like Billy can, and do, turn their lives around. Unfortunately, however, many do not.
Now, I’m certainly NOT advocating Borstals (or their present day equivalents) as the way forward – it goes without saying that it would be so much better if kids like Billy could be presented with the opportunity to turn their lives around whilst at school – but, I do agree with Tramps that the present ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach has, at best, no relevance, and, at worse, a thoroughly demoralising effect on some kids.
Quite what the answer is, I’ve no idea: I suppose TCK is right when he advocates leaving it to the experts.
Incidentally, Sticky, I’ve downloaded some samples of John Taylor Gatto’s books onto my kindle. Thanks, they look interesting.
2 Likes
Owen Smith: “The Prince Philip of the Labour Party”.
This is a funnier take on it.
And one on May for balance.
5 Likes