The Social Mobility Commission are totally wrong to suggest that parental earnings are the key to success in life.
Parental earnings are merely an indicator that they value education and hard work.
No amount of money thrown at the poorest members of society will change this.
"The Social Mobility Commission - which is comprised of charity leaders, academics and economists - was set up last year at the instigation of Mr Clegg."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I don't totally disagree with the headline statement, only with the socialist solution of doling out more money on the basis of supposed need without considering deserts or the likelihood of these families actually making good use of this money.
There is a case for helping kids who show aptitude despite poor schooling (in theory) but
too easy welfare and failing to reward effort simply locks in failure.
Un-PC though it may be to say it, but there is a hereditary factor. Intelligent people succeed more often and breed brighter kids.
Somewhere in the MSM reporting of this (I think FT) is the timeless classic "children who have been to private school tend to get better jobs", well d'uh, that's why parents spend all that money sending them to private school.
It's like saying "people who spend £50,000 on a new Mercedes tend to have a more comfortable ride than people who buy a third hand Ford Fiesta".
We can't give everybody a chance to buy a £50,000 new Mercedes but we could quite easily offer parents vouchers equivalent to the full cost of a state school place of about £7,000 and let them get on with it.
Yes, of course, set up a commission that chews up huge amounts of money and time, get a press release policy at the end of it, declare problem solved, forget about it.
Many years ago - in South wales - when I was a university student I wa surprised at the vehemence with which coal miners advocated getting higher education to me.
So, so true! My favourite example of socialists blindness to causality is the Bookstart programme. Ruth Kelly noticed that children who came from homes where there were lots of books did better at school. Her solution - give away lots of books. I suspect most of them end up on the fire.
Why can't someone like Ruth Kelly ask "why do they have more books?"
Post a Comment