|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 10, 2023 10:47:46 GMT
I am a great fan of Peter Hitchens ( I admired his brother Christopher too).
His latest column was about an autobiography written by Polly Toynbee.
I’ve taken a few lines from his column because imo it sums up the current situation quite nicely.
“One of the things she found, in two different and widely spaced explorations, was that poor people are significantly worse off now than they were 50 years ago, in real terms. I agree with her.
The country is going backwards, and more of us ought to grasp that, for our decline will not spare the chattering classes to which Polly and I both belong, or anybody else.
There is a lot that needs fixing out there, and I agree with her about that, too. I think that her side, the radical side, has done a lot of good in our country and has rightly drawn attention to many ills and injustices.
But they have also done some harm, especially in their vast failed project to replace the family with the State.
This argument will never stop because neither side is totally right nor totally wrong.”
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jun 10, 2023 11:21:01 GMT
I did chuckle at the bit about education - how can someone be so obtuse?.. 
"She asks why the thrilling social mobility of the post-war years could not last for ever.
Yet she ludicrously calls the system of academically selective state education, the 11-plus and grammar schools a ‘social guillotine’.
If it was such, how come privately schooled, Kensington-dwelling Polly failed the exam and didn’t go to a grammar school?
And how come two thirds of grammar-school pupils came from working-class homes in the days before the Left smashed up almost all such schools in an egalitarian frenzy?"
|
|
|
|
Post by dodgydave on Jun 10, 2023 12:16:28 GMT
People are worse off now than in the 1970s?
Utter, utter, bullshit. Two middle class people harking back to the reality of a tiny few, not the majority, who had grew up with fuck all in the 70s.
The difference today, is that people who make no use of the opportunities provided (mainly free education) cannot just stumble into apprenticeships in big factories, so they are hit especially hard by the realities of drifting through life.
This is our biggest challenge, how do we motivate people that do not value education... but expect the state to pick up the pieces.
|
|
|
|
Post by bancroft on Jun 10, 2023 12:23:23 GMT
Near me the local technical college always seems busy.
The only major thing is housing and renting costs.
|
|
|
|
Post by piglet on Jun 10, 2023 12:43:01 GMT
It is truly crazy to suggest people were better off in the 70s, they were not, i can remember the 70s. As for the 11 plus, it has a use and it doesnt, its a comment on being 11. There is a personality type that doesnt reach its full potential till its early twenties, and its turbo charged from then on, everything they do is geared to learning, and they become extremely valuable people in many ways from then on.
The 11 plus in that sense is pointless. Again this discussion is about left and right, not about what is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 10, 2023 13:15:35 GMT
People are worse off now than in the 1970s? Utter, utter, bullshit. Two middle class people harking back to the reality of a tiny few, not the majority, who had grew up with fuck all in the 70s. The difference today, is that people who make no use of the opportunities provided (mainly free education) cannot just stumble into apprenticeships in big factories, so they are hit especially hard by the realities of drifting through life. This is our biggest challenge, how do we motivate people that do not value education... but expect the state to pick up the pieces. Isn’t that a rather large difference? |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 10, 2023 13:17:31 GMT
I did chuckle at the bit about education - how can someone be so obtuse?..
"She asks why the thrilling social mobility of the post-war years could not last for ever.
Yet she ludicrously calls the system of academically selective state education, the 11-plus and grammar schools a ‘social guillotine’.
If it was such, how come privately schooled, Kensington-dwelling Polly failed the exam and didn’t go to a grammar school?
And how come two thirds of grammar-school pupils came from working-class homes in the days before the Left smashed up almost all such schools in an egalitarian frenzy?"
Most of the kids I knew in my grammar school were working class and many did extremely well. |
|
|
|
Post by dodgydave on Jun 11, 2023 20:07:44 GMT
People are worse off now than in the 1970s? Utter, utter, bullshit. Two middle class people harking back to the reality of a tiny few, not the majority, who had grew up with fuck all in the 70s. The difference today, is that people who make no use of the opportunities provided (mainly free education) cannot just stumble into apprenticeships in big factories, so they are hit especially hard by the realities of drifting through life. This is our biggest challenge, how do we motivate people that do not value education... but expect the state to pick up the pieces. Isn’t that a rather large difference? Yes it is. Children are far more educationally motived that we ever were, so the chances of drifting and still doing ok in life are virtually zero. If you are not drilling this into your kids then you are failing them. This is what frustrates me with many on the left, they blame the "failing" school and put zero responsibility on the pupil. If you cannot address the problem of low-motivated people producing low-motivated children, how do they ever hope to solve the problem? If you have a school with a high proportion of low-motivated pupils, it is not rocket science to see how they will disrupt the learning of others and frustrate the teachers into moving on... leading to a cycle of worse and worse standards. Lack of funding is not the only thing that affects education, it is equally the attitude of the pupils. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 11, 2023 20:11:20 GMT
Isn’t that a rather large difference? Yes it is. Children are far more educationally motived that we ever were, so the chances of drifting and still doing ok in life are virtually zero. If you are not drilling this into your kids then you are failing them. This is what frustrates me with many on the left, they blame the "failing" school and put zero responsibility on the pupil. If you cannot address the problem of low-motivated people producing low-motivated children, how do they ever hope to solve the problem? If you have a school with a high proportion of low-motivated pupils, it is not rocket science to see how they will disrupt the learning of others and frustrate the teachers into moving on... leading to a cycle of worse and worse standards. Lack of funding is not the only thing that affects education, it is equally the attitude of the pupils. Well we could say that young people in the 70s were less educationally motivated because they could be vocationally educated after they left school. You don’t need a university education to be a centre lathe turner or a panel beater . |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jun 11, 2023 20:37:45 GMT
I am a great fan of Peter Hitchens ( I admired his brother Christopher too). His latest column was about an autobiography written by Polly Toynbee. I’ve taken a few lines from his column because imo it sums up the current situation quite nicely. “One of the things she found, in two different and widely spaced explorations, was that poor people are significantly worse off now than they were 50 years ago, in real terms. I agree with her. The country is going backwards, and more of us ought to grasp that, for our decline will not spare the chattering classes to which Polly and I both belong, or anybody else. There is a lot that needs fixing out there, and I agree with her about that, too. I think that her side, the radical side, has done a lot of good in our country and has rightly drawn attention to many ills and injustices. But they have also done some harm, especially in their vast failed project to replace the family with the State. This argument will never stop because neither side is totally right nor totally wrong.” I also like Peter Hitchens, I don't think he is quite as eloquent as his brother was, but he usually talks common sense. I disagree with Polly Toynbee, yes there's a lot that needs fixing but in my experience poor people are not significantly worse of now than they were 50 years ago. 50+ years ago we were poor, mum sometimes relied on neighbours because the social safety nets that people take for granted today didn't exist. Today neighbours wouldn't give a damn because yes, society has changed for the worse. Today people are more insular, they live in debt but still have the latest mobile phone, designer trainers and the ubiquitous 72 inch flat screen TV hanging on the wall with Skysport package. These days such trinkets are considered to be essentials. In my experience what people consider to be poor today is for the most part certainly not what I would consider poor to be. It's certainly not poor as we experienced it 50 or 60 years ago. Having said that I'm not a hardnosed bastard I don't look down on people who for whatever reason may be struggling, and that's largely because I know what it's like to be poor and I don't see much of it today. I accept I don't live in a deprived inner city sink estate. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 11, 2023 20:45:54 GMT
I will say that in my experience 1970 was a world away from 1979. A lot of changes happened in the UK and the world .
In 1970 it was reasonably easy to buy a flat or house and families with one earner was common . By 1979 credit controls made getting mortgage a nightmare and I could never have bought a flat on my wages alone. Renting a house was a nightmare too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jun 11, 2023 21:03:40 GMT
I will say that in my experience 1970 was a world away from 1979. A lot of changes happened in the UK and the world . In 1970 it was reasonably easy to buy a flat or house and families with one earner was common . By 1979 credit controls made getting mortgage a nightmare and I could never have bought a flat on my wages alone. Renting a house was a nightmare too. On that you have me at a disadvantage, I joined the army in 1977 aged 17 and stayed there until 1999, so from the age of 17 to 39 I was removed from civvy street. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 11, 2023 21:12:36 GMT
I will say that in my experience 1970 was a world away from 1979. A lot of changes happened in the UK and the world . In 1970 it was reasonably easy to buy a flat or house and families with one earner was common . By 1979 credit controls made getting mortgage a nightmare and I could never have bought a flat on my wages alone. Renting a house was a nightmare too. On that you have me at a disadvantage, I joined the army in 1977 aged 17 and stayed there until 1999, so from the age of 17 to 39 I was removed from civvy street. Yeah. I started work in 1971. Although I lived in Essex I knew two northern brothers who were squaddies ( both served in NI iirc). One of them was a PT instructor . I had a few laughs with those two. Not a bad bone in either of them . The PT instructor was a bit of a handful though 😁 |
|
