Poor pupils face a "double disadvantage"
- Thread starter elmarko
- Start date
I can't imagine that anyone thinks 'new school problem solved derp derp' and if they did they are obviously wrong.
I think most of us are in agreement really. The question is, what is the government doing to tackle lazy parents? What actually can they do? I'm not really sure in regard to the latter question.
Soldato
unless you suffer from some kind of mental / genetic illness that prevents your brain from learning there is no excuse for people to be 'thick' or stupid'. These 2 things are often confused with 'Laziness'
Learning is sometimes hard and people like the path of least resistance, even more so considering how much money is afforded to them by taking the path of least resistance.
I do agree it's a cultural thing, but we have to remember that money also influences culture, who people mix with & aspirations - these things are linked, much more than people often think.
The latter idea you have, while I'm unsure on how it would work, or if it would - it's definitely the kind of idea people should be proposing to be researched.
Some out of the box thinking & the willingness to address the problems at source is at least a step forward.
Better than simply blaming these people for turning out exactly how we know they will - garbage in, garbage out.
Caporegime
Of course they are linked, thats akin to claiming that people who commit crime are more likely to end up with a criminal record.
Peoples academic attitude determines their wealth to a fair extent.
Its not that being rich leads to a caring about education, its that caring about education leads to wealth.
These crime infested council estates exist because for years we have decided that we can ignore the parents of children and place the burden entirely on the state. How many times have we heard the phrase "Children failed by the education system", try children failed by their deadbeat parents.
Good parenting has very very little to do with wealth and plenty of people I know with rich parents didn't do well because their parents were so wrapped up in their jobs that they didn't take an interest in their children.
You think one person being poor disproves the theory based on large data-sets - when discussing averages?.
Can you even read?, do you know what anecdotal evidence is?.
Are you trolling or really this stupid?.
Soldato
I think for this generation at least, it is all but over. The state handouts for lazy parents have been far to generous over the last 20 to 30 years and as a result amlost a full generation of people have simply lost any kind of drive or motivation to get themselves educated or in full time employment.
That kind of conditioning is very hard to undo. I think all that this and future governments can do is make incremental changes over lengthy period of time to the overall benefits system slowly making it less prosperous to sit at home. This needs to be coupled with a decent reinforcing of family values and make sure the ecucation system in this country is fit for purpose, i.e don't water down exams to artificially inflate pass rates etc.
Soldato
Its clear that you are actually the stupid one. Direct experience from people can be gathered as evidence that shows the contrary of the bilge you are pumping.
Not really, people having varying levels of intelligence, you can be perfectly healthy but stupid.
Turning to insults when you can't argue effectively? Oh dear
Clearly not enough money was thrown at his teachers.
Caporegime
They do affect people aspirations but that has very little weight at this stage in a child's education. Till 16 it is mandatory and regardless of whether you want to be PM or a binman you should be encouraged to learn by your parents who are the most important thing in shaping your future at this stage. Your friends are important too but they get their ideas from their own parents. Chances are, a group of 10 friends who are underachievers will mostly have parents who are the same which is then mistaken as "bad friends influencing each other" when it is a bad group of parents all influencing their children badly.
In the problem areas it is not the lack of qualifications that are the biggest problem but the kind of adult that is being produced. Intelligence and grades are not that important but in these areas, the outcome is that these kids are angry, poorly educated and brought up by people that shouldn't be responsible for a fish let alone a child.
Last edited:
boohoo its always someone elses fault in the eyes of socialists - the opportunity exists for all people in this country to better themselves if they work hard and make the effort, something a lot of countries don't have. the vast majority of todays rich people were yesterdays poor.
Caporegime
And then grow up angry at a government for not giving them what they feel they deserve and go to forums to post thread after thread of socialist claptrap
Thats the problem isn't it. The parents want to don't blame themselves so tell the children lies about how the government doesn't care, it's not their fault etc which gives the children an excuse never to bother and the circle continues.
We live in a country that gives people every opportunity to better themselves if they start from a low position and yet so many instead just become less than they came into this world with.
I don't care how bright someone is but the type of person that comes from a really bad environment with bad parents tends to be a bit undesirable.
Soldato
(sources wikipedia and dollery therapeutic drugs)
Stupidity is subjective though.
Where is the bar set ?
Oligophrenia in medical terminology is translated as OLIGO for deficit and PHRENIA for mind, and is a term that offers some background regarding what is usually calssified as "mental retardation". This term is usually frowned upon and is not often used. The terms Stupid, idiot, Cretin, Moron etc add perspectives but again are quite objectionable.
So if by stupid we mean mentally deficit there is a medical way this can be defined in children and is usually manifested by one or more of the following:-
Medically it is defined using the IQ scale:-
- mild mental retardation,IQ 50–69, cognitive abilities equal to about half to two-thirds of standard, it is not always apparant.
- Moderate mental retardation IQ 35–49 is nearly always apparent within the first years of life.
What i am trying to get at through all this is that people are not naturally stupid, there would always some underlying medical factors that will make them incapable of the same levels of learning as the next person, laziness of course non withstanding as that is a life choice and not an affliction.
Last edited:
OK, it seems I'm going to have to take this very slowly for the benefit of a couple of people in here.
If John produced a report that said "on average 70% of people who wear blue hats are aggressive", would you think that finding a singular person in blue hat who wasn't aggressive proved that report wrong?.
I'm quite frankly amazed you know how to post on a forum.
It's not an insult, it's descriptive.Turning to insults when you can't argue effectively? Oh dear
If as an adult a person is incapable of understanding what "on average" means they are quite clearly stupid.
Have anything constructive to post? - didn't think so.
I don't receive any benefits & have done very well for myself - you make the false assumption that everybody who want's a greater degree of equality must be poor.And then grow up angry at a government for not giving them what they feel they deserve and go to forums to post thread after thread of socialist claptrap
I'd be amazed if you could even define socialism without opening up a wiki-page.
Last edited:
Ah so you're a Champagne Socialist?