[Archived] The General Election 2015

[Lancs Rover]

Now that is a completely different argument. Kids from poor backgrounds don't get the same chances as the rich kids. I'll agree there. Whether or not it's the Conservative or the Labour government's fault I don't know but it has nothing to do with genetic intelligence. I also don't know whether schoolkids get standard IQ tests or not these days. When I was young an IQ test was part of the 11 plus exam and standard for everyone (I passed). At 25 I took another IQ test and came out with a score of 140. I would agree that intelligent kids from all walks of life should be nurtured and given the chance of further education in the right subjects but they should have to work in this country at least for a while if they have had grants.

Intelligence whatever that means is only part of the story about how people get on. After all, why should intelligent people be privileged anyway? Intelligence doesn't confer any moral superiority.

I've been to a couple of undergraduate open days recently with our lad. Went to a few a couple of years ago. We commented on just how stonkingly middle class these events are. Not posh just self-assured. Many people have a lot invested in the university system as it currently stands. Whether kids from working class homes are deserving or not, the door tends to be well and truly closed to them. Nominally open but in practice it won't be open for them very easily. Gordon is right. There is discrimination but without social capital, which basically means privileged access on the grounds of one's culture, working class kids will be effectively locked out.

I'm researching a PhD myself at the moment. I've been approached to write a book recently on a topic related to this. I've presented my work at lots of academic conferences and met lots of people. I've yet to meet anyone with a Blackburn accent or one even close to it. No-one will say so, but as soon as I open my mouth, people's prejudices start forming. I was asked recently whether I'd ever owned a house. A couple of years ago, a very well respected academic attended one of my presentations. It was a small room. I could see her as I was speaking. She was hiding - literally - behind the person in front her. I caught her expression. She was watching my talk and trying hard not to laugh. I'm pretty sure it was a combination of my accent and the fact that my work was probably better than hers. I should have took a friend's advice, one of the few academics I know who can count themselves as a football fan. He deliberately underperforms at conferences because some of these overcompetitive academics will undermine those who they feel threatened by.

Working class kids need discrimination to help them take the next step in education. But that's only part of the story because higher education in particular doesn't value working class culture - except as an object of study.

[thenodrog]

As for the subjects people choose to study, I agree with Gav. Uni is about learning so much more than just your chosen field. It exposes you to people and ideas you just don't get anywhere else. I'm still paying back the loans I got for my degrees. Neither led directly to a job in that field but I don't regret either of them. It made me the person I am today. The loan repayment comes out of my bank account like any other tax, after i met the salary threshold.

The governments role should be to make uni accessable to all those with the ability to complete a degree. In this way the system of loans we have today works quite well, as long as the tuition fees are capped. I'm not a fan of some unis setting their own fees, being elitist and pricing people out. All degrees should cost the same, all unis should as well.

Now if the government wants to provide extra support for those studying degrees leading to shortage jobs, then that makes perfect sense too. Scholarships are a win win situation. If someone is from a less well off background and wants to go to uni, the government can help by investing in them. The country will reap the benefits later.

Higher education is not the problem in the UK. We excel in that area. It is primary and secondary where we are failing. So many are leaving school at 16 without the basics.

My argument is that pupils with potential, coming from a poor background will not realise their potential and go to university because of what the Tories have done. Clearly having parents who are intelligent has an influence on the kid being intelligent, however external factors have just as much an influence on the development of the child.

I'm very open Al to most things as I don't have a fixed mindset but a growth mindset

Tell you what I haven't heard for a long time and which both ticks me off and illustrates my point. It's a 6th former who knows what he is going to do. Whenever I ask A 'level students what they are going to do after their A' Levels the vast majority say "going to uni" as if that is just the next stage of their development, my next question really fuddles them "Oh really, what degree are you going to do"? Invariably this is answered with a shrug of the shoulders and a vague one word retort "dunno". Well it's high time they damned well did! It's usually these kids who end up on the useless dead end Media studies / Events Management / Beckham studies etc etc. Whether it's the fault of the parents, the kids or abjectly poor teaching staff and Careers Department I don't know, but that's usually the point when I see more of the taxpayers hard earned being frittered away, and that's when anger and exasperation kick in.

[Al]

Intelligence whatever that means is only part of the story about how people get on. After all, why should intelligent people be privileged anyway? Intelligence doesn't confer any moral superiority.

.

Privileged or not intelligent people tend to do better in life and there is nothing you or I can do about it. It's not a moral superiority but it's a superiority none the less.

[thenodrog]

Intelligence whatever that means is only part of the story about how people get on. After all, why should intelligent people be privileged anyway? Intelligence doesn't confer any moral superiority.

I've been to a couple of undergraduate open days recently with our lad. Went to a few a couple of years ago. We commented on just how stonkingly middle class these events are. Not posh just self-assured. Many people have a lot invested in the university system as it currently stands. Whether kids from working class homes are deserving or not, the door tends to be well and truly closed to them. Nominally open but in practice it won't be open for them very easily. Gordon is right. There is discrimination but without social capital, which basically means privileged access on the grounds of one's culture, working class kids will be effectively locked out.

I'm researching a PhD myself at the moment. I've been approached to write a book recently on a topic related to this. I've presented my work at lots of academic conferences and met lots of people. I've yet to meet anyone with a Blackburn accent or one even close to it. No-one will say so, but as soon as I open my mouth, people's prejudices start forming. I was asked recently whether I'd ever owned a house. A couple of years ago, a very well respected academic attended one of my presentations. It was a small room. I could see her as I was speaking. She was hiding - literally - behind the person in front her. I caught her expression. She was watching my talk and trying hard not to laugh. I'm pretty sure it was a combination of my accent and the fact that my work was probably better than hers. I should have took a friend's advice, one of the few academics I know who can count themselves as a football fan. He deliberately underperforms at conferences because some of these overcompetitive academics will undermine those who they feel threatened by.

Working class kids need discrimination to help them take the next step in education. But that's only part of the story because higher education in particular doesn't value working class culture - except as an object of study.

Hmmm....... I was once on holiday with 6 mates and the brother in law of one. This guy was from Manchester and had a strong Manc accent. Second night and after he'd had a few scoops, got to know us and was obviously becoming a little more confident he came out with "I hope you guys don't mind me saying so but your accents don't half make you sound thick". Coming from a bloke who sounded like John Cooper Clarke it was comical and we naturally gave him plenty of stick for the rtest of the break. BUT do you know what? He was bloody well right! I don't notice it so much down the pub and out and about but the minute a Blackburrrrrnian comes ont wirrrrreless urrrrt telly it's unmistakeable and I frequently cringe.

[Lancs Rover]

Privileged or not intelligent people tend to do better in life and there is nothing you or I can do about it. It's not a moral superiority but it's a superiority none the less.

I know where you're coming from, Al. I'd say 'getting on' is due to a combination of factors. Luck being one of them.

BUT do you know what? He was bloody well right! I don't notice it so much down the pub and out and about but the minute a Blackburrrrrnian comes ont wirrrrreless urrrrt telly it's unmistakeable and I frequently cringe.

It works both ways. I was speaking to a bloke at a conference in Brighton last year. He guessed where I came from straight away. Apparently used to live in Rossendale. He reckons the East Lancs twang is one of the most distinctive in the country.

[Al]

I know where you're coming from, Al. I'd say 'getting on' is due to a combination of factors. Luck being one of them.

No argument there Mark. Probably being lucky is more influential.

[ultrablue]

Reads somewhat different now I'd suggest? I shall await your apology but I won't be holding my breath.

No it still looks the same to me. I say it's social, you suggest genetics. Crystal clear.

And Al, I told you, I've worked in the interests of Queen and country ever since I moved abroad. I'm paying my students loans back too.

[thenodrog]

If you still can't see that you set the direction of the debate and that I responded logically to your suggestion then you can't have been a very good student. God save the Queen eh?

[ultrablue]

Well I'm ready to restate my position that the amount of crime commited by black people is nothing to do with their genes if you are.

[Al]

No it still looks the same to me. I say it's social, you suggest genetics. Crystal clear.

And Al, I told you, I've worked in the interests of Queen and country ever since I moved abroad. I'm paying my students loans back too.

I "liked" your post but I was referring only to the second line. Having nothing to do with your discussion with Theno.

Edit - Tell you what though, we are a long way from discussing the General Election now. Perhaps we should move to a new thread on politics and ethics.

[Steve Moss]

North America don't do steak pudding ,chips , mushy peas and gravy ,with tea cake and a can of fizzy Vimto

That's a feature, not a bug.

There.

Anyway it may well be proven that genetics does play some part in intelligence, all things being equal. But thats the thing. Things have never and will never be equal. Circumstances will always trump any genetic quirk. Opportunities and expectations are the overiding factors when it comes to academic success. If your parents went to university, you are likely to go too. Not because of any genetic programming but because they have the ability and the inclination to support you.

Genetics influence both intelligence and behavior, and a bunch of other things, but more intelligence than behavior:

"The researchers found that genes had a greater influence on test scores in English, science and math than they did on other factors such as personality, behavior and health.

Still, the researchers said everything is linked: Genes play a big role in areas like personality, intelligence and behavior, and they all work together to affect test scores. The researchers cautioned that this doesn't mean a child of smart parents will automatically do well on tests, though."

http://consumer.healthday.com/kids-health-information-23/child-development-news-124/genes-may-play-big-role-in-academic-success-study-suggests-692408.html

So my suggestion is to chose wisely when marrying and having children. Look for brains more than bust size. Your kids will be the better for it.

And there is the problem with the government paying for people to educate people in necessary jobs and medicine. The first thing they do is to go abroad to work to make more money and this country gets no payback.

If this is true, it suggests that your medical professionals aren't being compensated all that well. People like money and status. Pay more and you'll attract the best and brightest to the field. Pay less, and the best and brightest will go elsewhere, either in education choices or place of work.

[jim mk2]

Thouight qegs entrance exam was just to allow in thick rich kids. Pretty sure it was in my time.

Silly comment.

QEGS entrance exam was tough. I assume you failed it.

QEGS was full of kids from all backgrounds - including poor ones. But they were intelligent.

QEGS has always has been.the best school in the area.

[Baz]

And there is the problem with the government paying for people to educate people in necessary jobs and medicine. The first thing they do is to go abroad to work to make more money and this country gets no payback.

So with the subjects you want to back, maybe you could say the government will repay your student loans as long as you are in this country. If you move on then you have to continue your own repayments?

(Besides which I don't think many actually move abroad)

[Al]

So with the subjects you want to back, maybe you could say the government will repay your student loans as long as you are in this country. If you move on then you have to continue your own repayments?

(Besides which I don't think many actually move abroad)

I was referring to grants rather than loans. Loans should be repaid anyway. If our doctors qualified here don't move abroad why are nearly all our doctors foreign?

[Paul]

The GMC reported in January 2015 36.6% of doctors are foreign trained making the majority UK trained.

The GMC said "that some of the foreign-trained doctors on the register may not be actively working in the NHS, while others could be working in private hospitals, and some may be British nationals who gained their qualifications abroad."

Basically we don't train sufficient medical staff in many areas and clearly it is not only British medical students who chose to work outside of their native country after qualifying.

[Al]

The GMC reported in January 2015 36.6% of doctors are foreign trained making the majority UK trained.

The GMC said "that some of the foreign-trained doctors on the register may not be actively working in the NHS, while others could be working in private hospitals, and some may be British nationals who gained their qualifications abroad."

Basically we don't train sufficient medical staff in many areas and clearly it is not only British medical students who chose to work outside of their native country after qualifying.

Not doubting your figures Paul but why is it then that every time I see a doctor, particularly a GP he/she is foreign trained. The only British I see are well paid consultants and surgeons. All I can think is that most of the British ones are in private practices and possibly in the South.

[Paul]

The GPs in our practice, as are all the staff, are British. My guess, and it's only based on half heard radio discussion, is many urban areas have greater difficulty in recruiting many types of professional, teachers, GPs, etc.

[T J Hooker]

Privileged or not intelligent people tend to do better in life and there is nothing you or I can do about it. It's not a moral superiority but it's a superiority none the less.

that's absolute @#/?, I work in a factory where most people earn between minimum wage and about £10per hour(with the majority being closer to minimum) and they have all kinds of intelligence levels and skills but they are were they are because although they may be very intelligent and knowledgeable they have various other issues ie. they've had knock backs in there life, they have very poor social skills, mental health problems, they're content to just to get by with enough to pay the bills, they've had little to no support or encouragement in their life, etc... there are all kinds of things that can easily outweigh a persons intelligence and stop them from really doing well in life.

On the other hand ive worked under some managers, company owners, directors, supervisors, etc.... that where/are thick as pig @#/? but they're doing well for themselves because they're experts at BS'in or because of good old fashioned nepotism.

The government should crack down on nepotism at the workplace to create a fairer society, but they won't because the house of parliament is the hub of nepotism in this country.

[Al]

The GPs in our practice, as are all the staff, are British. My guess, and it's only based on half heard radio discussion, is many urban areas have greater difficulty in recruiting many types of professional, teachers, GPs, etc.

It must be good to live where you do Paul. Leafy groves, Doctors who understand you and few Mosques.

If the above post is replying to me TJ you are wasting your time. You are on ignore and I do not open your posts.

[ABBEY]

Multi cultural wheelton

[T J Hooker]

It must be good to live where you do Paul. Leafy groves, Doctors who understand you and few Mosques.

If the above post is replying to me TJ you are wasting your time. You are on ignore and I do not open your posts.

Yes sure, thats one way of avoiding having to come up with a reply

[thenodrog]

Well I'm ready to restate my position that the amount of crime commited by black people is nothing to do with their genes if you are.

Unfortunately passing O'Level biology decades ago does not qualify me to comment with any accuracy. I'm surprised that you can be so definite too unless our Queen is employing you as a geneticist. However I will say the stats do seem to be against your opinion, but then again a 1 year course studying Statistics does not really qualify me to comment on that either.

What is undeniable is that there are differences between the different races (and different sexes too) and different conditions do result from such. As far as medical conditions the percentages of lactose intolerance and sickle cell anaemia spring to mind. Since the 80's arguments still abound that males with an extra Y chromosome are more aggressive and more prone to criminality then those without. We are still only scratching the surface of genetics so I'd suggest that rather than coming down heavily on side or the other on the basis of nothing more than political expedience and attempts at cheap point scoring in some irrelevant debate that it's probably best to keep an open mind ultrablue.

[thenodrog]

Silly comment.

QEGS entrance exam was tough. I assume you failed it.

QEGS was full of kids from all backgrounds - including poor ones. But they were intelligent.

QEGS has always has been.the best school in the area.

I didn't even take it. I had absolutely no desire to go to a school that had no girls, no mates, and one that I would have had to cycle there and back every day when free bus travel was available at another Grammar that had a higher academic success rate. Five of my school year did take it though and every one of them got in too. There was only one who I'd say was better academically than I at junior school (in fact two really surprised me). He and another guy who went to Grammar school with me absolutely stood out as being academically brilliant.

btw best school? I seem to rem even St Mary's College had a longer list in the Telegraph O'Level and A' level results page than qegs. In column inches Qegs were always behind the 3 local Grammars of Accrington, Clitheroe and Darwen too. Emphasises the stupidity of the Labour govt in scrapping them and ushering the dreadful comprehensive system.

I must say your comments re: Queen Elizabeths Grammar scholl do tend to go against the rest of your socialist principles..... or are you just a cherry picking champagne socialist at heart?

that's absolute @#/?, I work in a factory where most people earn between minimum wage and about £10per hour(with the majority being closer to minimum) and they have all kinds of intelligence levels and skills but they are were they are because although they may be very intelligent and knowledgeable they have various other issues ie. they've had knock backs in there life, they have very poor social skills, mental health problems, they're content to just to get by with enough to pay the bills, they've had little to no support or encouragement in their life, etc... there are all kinds of things that can easily outweigh a persons intelligence and stop them from really doing well in life.

On the other hand ive worked under some managers, company owners, directors, supervisors, etc.... that where/are thick as pig @#/? but they're doing well for themselves because they're experts at BS'in or because of good old fashioned nepotism.

The government should crack down on nepotism at the workplace to create a fairer society, but they won't because the house of parliament is the hub of nepotism in this country.

It must be good to live where you do Paul. Leafy groves, Doctors who understand you and few NO Mosques.

If the above post is replying to me TJ you are wasting your time. You are on ignore and I do not open your posts.

Corrected it for you Al.

[ultrablue]

A well-measured response. Thank you. I'm with you that there are marked genetic trends which differ between races, genders etc. Perhaps in a perfect world, genes would be the sole influence on individual success. It would mean we had complete equality of opportunity and live in a true state of nature.

However,I just don't think genetics matters much at all. I'm of the opinion that in civilised society, nurture will always win over nature. Be it crime, education, employment or whatever social policy you may care to look at, we must never be sidetracked by the elements of broad generalisations and inevitability genetics provides. It would only mean taking our eyes off the ball and ignoring geniune inequalities in the system that effect many more than genetic probability ever could. We should provide equality of opportunity to all. However, with our un-level playing field, social change must remain front and centre of political debate.

[T J Hooker]

I know one theings for sure, if i was very intelligent, doing well in life, with money to spare and had plenty of time on my hands i could think of a million and one other good things to be doing with my life instead of bickering like a sado on here all day just to kill time.