Drivel about social mobility
Posted by Christie Malry on May 2, 2012 at 10:20 am
Britain’s failure means a poor child born in 1970 is less likely to have gone to university than one born in 1958, the MPs say.
Eh? That must be total bollocks, given that the number of university home places now is much, much higher than it was then.
Later in the article, they explain:
In 1981, children from the richest fifth of households were three times more likely than those from the poorest fifth to go to university. By the late 1990s, they were five times more likely to go.
But that's not the same thing at all. Because there are more university places, it's meant that more poor people can go than ever before. The fact that richer people are also more likely to go is irrelevant to the opportunities for the poor.
And we can't let this go:
Studies have shown that while only 42 per cent of parents in the poorest fifth of homes read to their children every day, 78 per cent of those in the richest fifth do so.
Wealthier parents are also more likely to send their children to bed at a regular time. It has led to richer children being more likely to be deemed ‘ready’ for school at three.
These both cost nothing. And it's pretty hard to blame the rich for the poor not reading to their kids or putting them to bed on time.
Posted from WordPress for Android. Post may be amended or reformatted later.
"while only 42 per cent of parents in the poorest fifth of homes read to their children every day, 78 per cent of those in the richest fifth do so." ... which does rather hint at why they are poor doesn't it?
This whole mobility thing comes, of course, from the great religion of "equality", whose followers were more upset at the proportion of steerage passengers getting to the Titanic's lifeboats than the fact that she sank in the first place.
Essentially "people too lazy to even read to their own children tend to earn less than people who can actually be bothered to get off their fat bottom and do something". Isn't that how we want society to reward behaviours?
A real chance for doing away with unemployment here. The gummerment should be sending non-reading inspectors round to my house to make sure my kids stay up late and to confiscate books.
Reckon about 1,000,000 inspectors should just about do it.
Good grief, do I have to feel guilty for working with my kids????