Yes indeed, and the issue of parenting has been raised by some on this thread. The problem I see is that there is a vicious circle, which needs to be broken. Of course schools and teachers can only go so far, but it is one place where some difference can be made.For me the issue is with parenting (or lack of) and peer pressure. The schools are there & the teachers are qualified. Perhaps the "rich" schools have better teachers, but surely the teachers in poorer schools are good enough to at least get their pupils through the Leaving Cert if all of the pupils were willing?
Regarding parenting : how parents try to raise their children is a personal choice.
Regarding peer pressure : this is more difficult to overcome, but with good parenting from the outset most children will see that the eejits and bullies in the yard are just eejits and bullies. Again, a personal choice.
I have long believed that education is key - but education comes from both state institutions and from parents. Parents are supposed to teach us values, while school gives us knowledge. Education is often spoken of as if it were just the acquisition of knowledge - but the application of this knowledge is even more important, and often ignored. It is not enough that we teach people how to earn a living, we must also strive to show the value of making a life. And, of course, the importance of respecting the lives of others.
I'm not sure if you are trying to evade or spin this issue by talking about 'perceptions'. This is not a matter of perception. The playing field is very, very unlevel.Any perception of an uneven playing field is not due to capitalism, and certainly not free market capitalism. Let me reiterate, we do not have free market capitalism; we have a corrupted version more aptly called crony capitalism and interventionism.
The reason the playing field is perceived as not level, is because those things that government, and not capitalism, is responsible for, are so totally inadequate, with education being the biggest problem.
There are many theories why people from less well off areas achieve less from an educational point of view than people from well off areas. Bottom line is that school education in deprived areas does not function well enough. Not only is the early drop out rate higher, but the number of people seeking further 3rd level education is lower. But access to education cannot be blamed, neither affordability.
All the items you quote above can be solved through education. But for this to happen politicians would have to admit that their system has failed for all these years, and does not give them reason to introduce yet another agency or committee to deal with the problem. Social problems are a direct result of bad and big government, and giving government ever increasing powers to expand their meddling in the economy and lives of citizens is only going to make things worse.
Perhaps the fact that we are down the bottom of the OECD league for spending on education might be part of that problem.
The problem I see is that there is a vicious circle, which needs to be broken.
I'm not sure if you are trying to evade or spin this issue by talking about 'perceptions'. This is not a matter of perception. The playing field is very, very unlevel.
As it happens, I agree with you that education is the solution. Perhaps the fact that we are down the bottom of the OECD league for spending on education might be part of that problem.
It can a bit hard to do evening courses if you are already working 2 or 3 jobs to keep your head above water. Why do you think people from poor backgrounds generally have poor jobs and poor education?The reason I chose the word perception is because there is essentially nothing stopping someone from a poor background joining various courses that will increase chances of higher wages and a better standard of living.
It can a bit hard to do evening courses if you are already working 2 or 3 jobs to keep your head above water. Why do you think people from poor backgrounds generally have poor jobs and poor education?
I see the following as 3 (true) stereotype upper middle class
obsessions/preocupations
Obsession with Private schools
Obsession with Private health care
Obsession with Accents
They seem to me to be the main every day definers of class
Obsession is a strong word but:
Private schools have a reputation for very good LC results - given how important education is, is this not a good option for parents who can afford it?
Private healthcare is a must in this country IMO. Again is this not a prudent decision for those who can afford it?
By the way, I've posted before that a solution to the 2 tier health system is to ban private health care (thus forcing everyone from B Cowen down though the public system - no preferential treatment). I'm sure it wouldn't take too long for the "important" people of this country to force the HSE into action. The same would hold true (to a lesser agree) for private schools. Until those days arise (which I doubt never will), I think for those who can afford it, private schools & private healthcare are good choices...I'm not saying it's fair!
Accents are neither here nor there.
+100, couldn't agree with you more Firefly. Sort these two things out and we will have a fairer society in a very short period of time.
Private education subsidised public education in that if all of the students in private schools were attending public schools the state would have to cover the full cost of their education. At the moment the state only covers part of it.
Absolutely true.I though that private schools got the same capitation as any other school, and also have the additional revenue of fees.
I don't think there is any tax relief on private school fees.No more tax relief on private school/college/doctor fees.
Are you sure about this? I though that private schools got the same capitation as any other school, and also have the additional revenue of fees.