"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 19 Apr 2004 22:00:49 +0100, "IMM" wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 19 Apr 2004 11:57:24 +0100, "IMM" wrote:


The way you defend cowboyism and the vast profits they make, leads me
to
believe you may have a cowboy streak in you too.

I'm not defending cowboyism at all.

You are.

I talked only about profit. You raised the subject of cowboyism.

We need people to go to universities,
as history will show that a highly
educated population always prospers.

Yes but that notion does not extend to 50%
of the population going to "university" as
Mr EU Turn seems to think.

Has someone done a study to assess what %age need to go to uni? Those
who
are against are mainly Little Middle Englanders.

Not really - only realists.

Since when have Little Middle Englanders been realists.

There's nothing wrong
with higher education for a broad section of the population as such -
it is question of appropriateness. Not everybody can benefit from an
academic university education,

What a stupid comment.

It isn't at all.

It is.

Not everybody will benefit from an academic
university education. That's obvious because not everybody is
academically gifted.

They must be academically gifted to be accepted for uni. Can't you figure
that out?

Some people are gifted in other areas, but it
doesn't make them less valuable members
of society.

The idiotic view you have. What you are proposing is that working class
kids should be plasterers and the middle class go to uni.

The problem lies in the misguided belief that academic education and
institutions delivering it should be delivered to everybody or at
least a substantial proportion.

Quite right too.

That is plainly impossible, because
only a small percentage actually *do*
benefit from a high level
academic education.

Another meaningless empty statement.

The mistake is in not accepting that
but in dropping standards to make
it happen.

No proof of this.

It does a disservice to the students and reduces skill
levels. Not what should be happening at all.

University is geared in the UK to make you think, not supply you with craft
skills.

The even bigger mistake is in arguing that this has to do with
snobbery and elitism.

It is, as Little Middle Englanders are obsessed with petty snobbery.

It has nothing to do with those at all.
You can have excellence in particle
physics and excellence in
carpentry. Both are important to society
as a whole.

But you want the carpenter to come from the council estate. How dare they
sent him to a uni with your kids in!

The real question is why is there a
proposal to bribe 16 year olds to
stay on in education?

We need a highly educated population. Graduates tend to be into
positions
of power. If many of them are from the working class a form of
meritocracy
will prevail, and hopefully these people will get rid of the public
school/Oxbridge self interest group.

It isn't a class issue at all

It is. Those who bring it up are all brainwashed right wing Tory types like
you.

You can't be that dumb. The riches people
in the UK take RENT and become
billionaires to the detriment of the people
as a whole. That is obvious.

I'm not at all dumb.

You must be, you can't see it.

People own property. They let it to
others and charge a rent.
It's simple return on investment.

Land is NOT property, the bricks on it are. Also the parasites own most of
the land. Read:

Who Owns Britain by Kevin Cahill
The Theft of the Countryside by Marion Shoard
Whose Land is it Anyway? by Richard Norton-Taylor

So some people have more than others. That's how it is.

We know how it is and you think it is right that we are ripped off by a few.
What is so astounding is that you like being ripped off.

To illustrate the brutality of power in relation to land-ownership, the
period 1990 to 1997 when over 5,000,000 families had their homes repossessed
by mortgage-lenders, while in the same period the 157,000 wealthiest
families in the UK received up to £21 billion in subsidies.