Get rid of Democracy

Red Hand

On the subject of education, should that be Uni-taught education or self-taught? For not all that one picks up in organised education may be useful in governing? Is it the persistence facet of education (sticking at something for four years or more, though it may be soul-destroying) that makes it attractive to people who would like to see only educated people in government? Is there a cut-off point where you should not be let into government? Suggestions welcome.:)

Not sure how chemical engineering was useful to Magerate Thatcher as PM (or Pat Kenny for TV!).:)

Ben Franklin, one of the most talented people of his age, never held a degree.

ISAW

magpie wrote:

Ok, and there are a number of reasons for this - e.g. lack of role models, low expectancy / self-esteem, being able to leave school and make €2000 a week on a buildinng site etc.

come off it! Who is leaving school and making 2000 a week on a building site?

The question is how do you encourage more involvement in education? Not being allowed to vote unless you attain a certain standard would certainly focus the issue.

Indeed it would. So rt of "disenfranchise the plebs" eh? You are a FG voter aren't you?

And vice versa, all socio-economic groups tend to protect their own best interest, with the exception of a long history of Middle and Upper Class Philanthropists who have bettered the lot of the lower classes.

have you any examples of a pennnyless person who was a philanthropist? In fact most wealth is inhereted and not given to the poor. The "earn all you can give all you can" Thatcherite ideal didnt come to pass. Or was it the FG motto?:) What bettered the lot of the lower classes wanst rich people giving them anything so much as people organising and demanding fairness.

When people take a conscious decision not to send their children to school and to rear them by the roadside its hard to have sympathy for their appalling levels of education - given that its self-inflicted.

Being born into poverty isnt self inflicted! The Irish people who were evicted and thrown out onto the raodside by absentee landlords didnt chose to be homeless. And the Land League was organised from the bottom up!

I was trying to be humorous.

As a Fine Gael voter? Why didn't you include Eoin O Duffy instead of Bertie then eh?

Not quite, the point is everyone knows he didn't attend either UCD or the LSE - yet he claimed on his CV that he had and was not able to provide any evidence that he was telling the truth.

Where does he claime it and how do you know that?

You know when you go for a job and they ask for your Degree Certificates?

Actually sometimes they dont. there is the lecturer in the Smuffit Business school and the government science adviser.

Same thing, except Bertie doesn't have the certs and the 2 institutions in question say they have no record of him ever attending.

Can yo produce evidence of Bertie saying he attended and evidence of the institutions saying he didnt?

Quod Est Demonstrandum - "as has been shown", in this instance that all despots are badly-educated - based on an indicative sample of 4. And Bertie for laughs.

[/quote]

But my point was what was already shown to be true? It was NOT already demonstrated. All swans are white based on the sample one sees in Dublin. then I show yo a black swan. Your logic is in error and does not prove what you claim hense it is NOT QED!

ISAW

Akrasia wrote:

there are very few people from these areas making anything close to €2000 a week. The reasons for the disadvantage is largely down to a severe lack of resources put into these communities, and the reason there are so few resources, is because the existing political elites are furthering their own interests and not the interests of these working class people.

Well this isnt really true either. One way to combat poverty is to create jobs. ireland is doing very well at that. Another thing is that the working classes living in dublin have relatively a lot of wealth since they have very cheap or free housing. They are rich compared to the lower middle classes even though their earnings may be lower since the middle classes have no property or have huge mortgages eating away take home pay.

the problem is we have become a "jam today" society.


another huge growth are in the system is the amount of public jobs in these areas. this is particularly true in N Ireland. The "poverty industry" is what some call it.

The question is how do you encourage more involvement in education? Not being allowed to vote unless you attain a certain standard would certainly focus the issue.

Really? so the best way to help empower disadvantaged people is to disempower them even further?

Well you dont encourage it by getting rid of fees which working class people didnt pay and giving that money to the middle class do you?

So what you are suggesting is to take away all representation from the poor and give it to the rich. and this will improve democracy? you really don't understand the implications of what you are saying.

Oh I think he understands the implications. He just thinks they are justified. and Labour want to go into governmebt with the likes of that?

the flaws in your logic are breathtaking. you can not make a categorical assertion based on an 'indicative sample', You don't define what 'badly educated' is, you can not make a conclusion from only one premise other than a tautology etc etc etc

QED

ISAW

Jeremiah 16:1 wrote:

On the subject of education, should that be Uni-taught education or self-taught? For not all that one picks up in organised education may be useful in governing? Is it the persistence facet of education (sticking at something for four years or more, though it may be soul-destroying) that makes it attractive to people who would like to see only educated people in government? Is there a cut-off point where you should not be let into government? Suggestions welcome.:)

Sorry I missed this point. When I stated a certified piece of paper I meant to ask whether that is education. I am happy to say living for four years with a group of peers is a better "education" than the degree one gets for passing examinations over the same period.

Not sure how chemical engineering was useful to Magerate Thatcher as PM

It helped her produce the patent of the process for putting air into ice cream and other foods.

(or Pat Kenny for TV!).:)

Well he can handle science and pseudoscience better than Gay Byrne.

Ben Franklin, one of the most talented people of his age, never held a degree.

Patrick Moore is also self educated.

magpie

have you any examples of a pennnyless person who was a philanthropist? In fact most wealth is inhereted and not given to the poor. The "earn all you can give all you can" Thatcherite ideal didnt come to pass. Or was it the FG motto? What bettered the lot of the lower classes wanst rich people giving them anything so much as people organising and demanding fairness.

Alan Sugar

The Irish people who were evicted and thrown out onto the raodside by absentee landlords

I was actually making reference to the point someone made earlier about travellers having a low level of education.

Can yo produce evidence of Bertie saying he attended and evidence of the institutions saying he didnt?

Even the man who holds the top job in the country has had his difficulties over inconsistencies in his CV. While there is no suggestion that the Taoiseach deliberately lied or misled the public about his qualifications, in November 2001 the Fianna Fail website listed Bertie Ahern's third-level education as: "Rathmines College of Commerce, University College Dublin and London School of Economics."

That same month the Taoiseach was quoted in a new book, My Best Advice, as saying: "I obtained my accountancy qualification (in the College of Commerce, Rathmines) and later completed further diploma courses through the London School of Economics in taxation and business administration."

Sharp-eyed observers noted that the Taoiseach failed to make any mention in the book of his time at UCD. When a spokesman for Mr Ahern was asked to explain the omission, he said: "He has never claimed to hold degrees from UCD or anywhere else. I don't know what he got (after Rathmines College). He remembers doing the courses, but not what they were."

Attempts by reporters to trace Mr Ahern's attendance record at UCD or the London School of Economics proved unsuccessful. The reference on the Fianna Fail website to his studies at the LSE was subsequently deleted.

From: http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=45&si=1456273&issue_id=12908

Ahern was educated at St. Patrick's National School in Drumcondra, St. Aidan's Christian Brothers in Whitehall, and Dublin Institute of Technology. He has also claimed, or it was claimed by others on his behalf in circulated biographies, that he was educated at University College Dublin and the London School of Economics. Neither university has any records that show Ahern was ever one of their students.[1] He worked in the Accounts Department of the Mater Hospital, Dublin, from where he is still technically on a career break[citation needed]; and has often been described, and has referred to himself, as an accountant. As there is no legal definition in Ireland of the term accountant this is technically correct. But he is not a qualified chartered, certified or public accountant. On the 8 October 2006 the Irish News of the World described him as 'an accounts clerk.'[1]

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertie_Ahern

Sleepy

ISAW wrote:

Well you dont encourage it by getting rid of fees which working class people didnt pay and giving that money to the middle class do you?

I want to take you to task on this glib statement. Do you honestly believe we would have the same level of education in this country without free fees? I'm from a middle-class background and had my parents had to pay for third level education, I wouldn't have gotten one. I'm hardly alone in this.

The one thing everyone in this thread seems to be in agreement on is that education is the key to an effective, equal democracy. Nearly all our economists agree that it has been one of the main driving driving forces behind our economic success of recent years and that if Ireland wishes to continue to prosper, it is going to have to be through the provision of a highly skilled, educated workforce.

If anything, free fees should be expanded upon so that there's no such thing as 'administration fees'; the maintenance grant system thoroughly overhauled so that it judges people on their own merits and not their parents' declared income and provides enough to at least cover the student's rent.

This may seem wasteful when there are those who can and will pay their offspring's way through college however the alternative means that people get left behind, denied an education because their parents can't, or won't, pay for it.

DadaKopf

If anything, free fees should be expanded upon so that there's no such thing as 'administration fees'; the maintenance grant system thoroughly overhauled so that it judges people on their own merits and not their parents' declared income and provides enough to at least cover the student's rent.

What do you mean "judges people on their own merits"? I'm with you on not judging students on the basis of their parents' declared incomes, but if "own merits" means 'intelligence', 'aptitudes' or academic success in school, then this further fuels inequality because inequality or social class determines this, too. How can this be tackled?

keynesian

thrill wrote:

The reason millions of North Koreans are not living in Ireland is because they are not free to leave their own country.

You seem to be under the impression we'd left them in and even if we did they wouldn't have the full rights of the state.

ISAW

Sleepy wrote:

I want to take you to task on this glib statement. Do you honestly believe we would have the same level of education in this country without free fees? I'm from a middle-class background and had my parents had to pay for third level education, I wouldn't have gotten one. I'm hardly alone in this.

First I can show what migh have been since we didnt decide it. Second fees are not FREE. someone pays. You are suggesting the tax payer pay for the middle classes and the rich as well as paying for the working classes and the poor. Third I dont believe people like you would not have gotten a third level education.

The one thing everyone in this thread seems to be in agreement on is that education is the key to an effective, equal democracy. Nearly all our economists agree that it has been one of the main driving driving forces behind our economic success of recent years and that if Ireland wishes to continue to prosper, it is going to have to be through the provision of a highly skilled, educated workforce.

that does nmot mean that educated people should rule over uneducated people. We even let people degrees vote and i am happy to do that but we dont insist that they only vote for people with degrees or that the Minister for Finance has to be an accountant or an economist.

If anything, free fees should be expanded upon so that there's no such thing as 'administration fees'; the maintenance grant system thoroughly overhauled so that it judges people on their own merits and not their parents' declared income and provides enough to at least cover the student's rent.

so you believe that someone who is worth a hundred million should have free third level and pay nothing?

This may seem wasteful when there are those who can and will pay their offspring's way through college however the alternative means that people get left behind, denied an education because their parents can't, or won't, pay for it.

But when partnts wont pay the children can move out and work and based on their earnings get a grant. but they prefer the soft life at home. Why should they have it easier than working class people? If you want to level the field shouldnt you discriminate in favour of the poorer people and give them more benefits for education?

ISAW

DadaKopf wrote:

What do you mean "judges people on their own merits"? I'm with you on not judging students on the basis of their parents' declared incomes, but if "own merits" means 'intelligence', 'aptitudes' or academic success in school, then this further fuels inequality because inequality or social class determines this, too. How can this be tackled?

If you stay at home and the house has income you pay fees. If you move out and get a job and a place of your own and work then you can claim a grant if your income is low. You could also get extra points for disadvantage.

DadaKopf

Wasn't asking you!!!