Reply to: Completely misguided government edict #1674656563365677

[doodab]

The more skilled your workforce is, the richer the country can become. That's why countries that keep half their workforce at home and want to stop their education are piss-poor tulip-holes.

Indeed. One of the benefits of educating women is that they educate their children, generally before they hit the school system. So the better educated women are, the better educated society as a whole becomes. This is an easily measured and confirmed phenomenon. Any society that refuses to educate it's women deserves to be described as backward.

[NotAllThere]

The more skilled your workforce is, the richer the country can become. That's why countries that keep half their workforce at home and want to stop their education are piss-poor tulip-holes.

Governments may well do the right thing in one area (attempting to raise educational standards for everyone) and still screw up royally in others (not controlling offshoring, expert immigration, benefit dependency).

[bobspud]

No. We're saying that if there are barriers to them working hard, they should be removed. Homework clubs (places of quiet and safety where they can study) are a case in point. Non-motivated kids won't go to them, motivated kids will.

Look at it from a higher up perspective.

Are the jobs there for full employment? Or are we looking to turn middle class well payed jobs into poor payed ones by using more competition of labour just so that the few can have even more money at the top?
Would the ICT companies that are raping the UK with a flood of bobs, stop flooding us if we had lots of well trained apprentices? (my view is probably not because we are paying them to train their own generation for free)

If we magically get all these kids to get off of their arse and work as hard, what are you offering them for their efforts? We are busy trying to cap our greenhouse gasses so mass production is gone and there are only so many skilled jobs to be had.

The biggest issue that we have in this country is that the dumb and lazy are not so dumb and lazy to have avoided figuring out the basics of reproduction or the effort required to squirt out kids. Indeed if the feckless took a tip from the pandas we would have no problems in a few generations.

[d000hg]

I don't have kids and my parents aren't thick so your insult makes no sense regardless how thick I am

Got a serious reply?

Hmmm. Maybe there is a God after all.

As I expected.

[NotAllThere]

...
Are we seriously saying that where we have weak or poor kids that are already having their living given to them by the state, we should be motivating them to work harder by giving them more??? Not all motivation is positive. sometimes you need to feel the blade on your nuts before you realise its not a fire drill and its down to you to own your own life...

No. We're saying that if there are barriers to them working hard, they should be removed. Homework clubs (places of quiet and safety where they can study) are a case in point. Non-motivated kids won't go to them, motivated kids will.

[doodab]

More wrong? Wrong is an absolute state and not subject to gradation.

In which case he's correct, you cannot be more wrong.

Although in practice when you a dealing with estimating magnitudes rather than answering yes/no questions there are degrees of wrong, which is why we have methods for working out error or inaccuracy.

[vetran]

The one thing I knew was that I did not want to live in a council house in Walthamstow and so I needed to buck my ideas up. That had to come from me. No one else could do it for me.

That's the nub of the problem - hunger.

[bobspud]

Give an idiot a million pounds they will still make stupid choices. Bad parents will be bad regardless of how many people try to "Help" them. Or the funding thrown at them.
We seem to think that everyone can be great if we solve problem X or Y. It's not the case. There is a vast majority that will unfortunately walk the earth wasting the air they breath.

I did nothing with my education when I was growing up. That was apart from Computer Science which I excelled (this was mainly through deviant hacking of the school network and trading of pirated games.) I was a straight C/D grade kid, but I was hungry. The one thing I knew was that I did not want to live in a council house in Walthamstow and so I needed to buck my ideas up. That had to come from me. No one else could do it for me.

Are we seriously saying that where we have weak or poor kids that are already having their living given to them by the state, we should be motivating them to work harder by giving them more??? Not all motivation is positive. sometimes you need to feel the blade on your nuts before you realise its not a fire drill and its down to you to own your own life...

[eek]

Very true. But if you are thick yourself, the state should help rather than let you make a mess of it and perpetuate the cycle.

I found this link http://forums.contractoruk.com/profi...st=ignore&u=82 improves cUK immeasurably.

[NotAllThere]

You couldn't be more wrong.

More wrong? Wrong is an absolute state and not subject to gradation.

[sasguru]

I don't have kids

Hmmm. Maybe there is a God after all.

[d000hg]

Is it helping you?

I don't have kids and my parents aren't thick so your insult makes no sense regardless how thick I am

Got a serious reply?

[sasguru]

But if you are thick yourself, the state should help ....

Is it helping you?

[d000hg]

Bottom line is parents need to get involved more.
Just as my dad taught me to read before I was 4, so I'm getting my lad to learn.
He's 3 and a half and can already read basic words phonetically.
I've also taught him the value of books, so once he learns to read, he can teach himself.
You can't rely on the state, you've got to teach your kids yourself, encourage them to be self-reliant in their learning.

Very true. But if you are thick yourself, the state should help rather than let you make a mess of it and perpetuate the cycle.

[d000hg]

But the point is that extra education is treating the symptom, not the cause. Poorer kids have poorer life chances, do less well at school, suffer poorer health over their lifetimes, are more likely to have mental health problems and a dozen other things, because they are poor. There is a ton of evidence that parentel socio economic status and not genetics is the primary factor.

Which is the whole point of schools doing things like breakfast club and free lunches... simply getting fed properly is a big difference. Also, the school is where they spend most of their waking hours and where they do most of their development, especially learning how to interact with other people... so in a very real sense school is about teaching the younger kids how to "be people" just as much as the parents are.