Rincewind Posted 7 July 2012 Posted 7 July 2012 we should ban ALL free education, if you cant afford to pay you probably arent worthy of and wont make use of education anyway. Once we stop all those poorer people getting educated, they can go to work on my plot of land, ill protect them and ensure their safety. Cmon end free education.. its the way of the future. Sounds a good idea. Could work with health care too. If a person cannot afford to pay for medical bills then they do not deserve to live amongst those that can so let them die or get jobs as funeral directors. It was good enough in the Victorian times so why not now when the government and banks need to save money. As for criminals, to cut down on overcrowded jails ship them off to Australia. PS This could viewed as tongue in cheek - or not.
Saxondale Posted 7 July 2012 Posted 7 July 2012 Sounds a good idea. Could work with health care too. If a person cannot afford to pay for medical bills then they do not deserve to live amongst those that can so let them die or get jobs as funeral directors. It was good enough in the Victorian times so why not now when the government and banks need to save money. You're comparing denying free education to denying emergency health care?
Saxondale Posted 7 July 2012 Posted 7 July 2012 No it isn't. Well, if it isn't, I've covered the other main reasons anyway. No they don't. The first proper sift is always for qualification standard (having got rid of everything on scented paper or in Comic Sans). Not in my experience. Apart from the Comic Sans thing, that's definitely true (and rightly so).Has there been any mention of M/S skills? Nope - but feel free to carry on polishing your badge of ignorance. This was just a polarised example.And, ladies and gentlemen, if you limit your education then you too can come across as intellectually stunted as this I'm very well educated, thank you. So, if you consider me intellectually stunted, that sort of goes against your point. As for the accusation itself, I take exception.This, like many other similar threads recently, is fundamentally a case of two schools of thought - socialism and conservatism (note small 'c'). To consider the opposite school of thought ignorant is inherently ignorant in itself. Myself and the likes of MattP, Webbo, MooseBreath et al are rarely going to agree with you on these sort of issues but that doesn't make our opinions any less valid, considered or 'correct'.
ADK Posted 7 July 2012 Posted 7 July 2012 You are quite right, this thread is about people who want to get further education so they can increase their skill set. What you said was that qualifications are required for entry level jobs which just isn't right. I come from the construction and mining industry and I'd say 70% of the workforce have basic educational abilities. That is they can read, write and have basic arithmetic skills. "Entry level" means the jobs in an industry you can expect to do without industry experience. Most careers are going to need some form of qualification however.
Smudge Posted 7 July 2012 Posted 7 July 2012 I'm talking about jobs not careers. A labourer going from one job to another labouring job won't be asked for an HND in shovelling
Daggers Posted 8 July 2012 Posted 8 July 2012 I'm very well educated, thank you. So, if you consider me intellectually stunted, that sort of goes against your point. As for the accusation itself, I take exception. This, like many other similar threads recently, is fundamentally a case of two schools of thought - socialism and conservatism (note small 'c'). To consider the opposite school of thought ignorant is inherently ignorant in itself. Myself and the likes of MattP, Webbo, MooseBreath et al are rarely going to agree with you on these sort of issues but that doesn't make our opinions any less valid, considered or 'correct'. It's not a case of your "school of thought" being opposite to mine - your "school of thought" is trite and wrong. I wasn't disagreeing with a group of you, I wasn't disagreeing with a position. If we're talking about education for personal reasons, ie. so people can 'better themselves', then they should fvcking well pay for it themselves. I wouldn't get free gym membership if I wanted to 'better myself' by getting hyper fit. You have equated improving an individual's level of education with you engaging in an activity of vanity. I sure at least one other member of your thought school can see how retarded that is. And there is a very marked difference to being well-qualified and well-educated. If you aren't intellectually-stunted then you gave no indication of such in the post I questioned.
Saxondale Posted 8 July 2012 Posted 8 July 2012 You have equated improving an individual's level of education with you engaging in an activity of vanity. I sure at least one other member of your thought school can see how retarded that is. You've made the assumption that the only reason anyone would want to get fit is vanity. Come on! And there is a very marked difference to being well-qualified and well-educated. If you aren't intellectually-stunted then you gave no indication of such in the post I questioned. This whole thing is about funding education leading to qualifications. If the certificates are not of fundamental importance, what's to stop people learning off their own back, ie. reading a book?
Daggers Posted 8 July 2012 Posted 8 July 2012 You've made the assumption that the only reason anyone would want to get fit is vanity. Come on! "...if I wanted to 'better myself' by getting hyper fit." Yea - you'd be getting hyper-fit for the good of your health. Gyms cover themselves in mirrors and are full of people staring at their biceps in those mirrors because? This whole thing is about funding education leading to qualifications. If the certificates are not of fundamental importance, what's to stop people learning off their own back, ie. reading a book? Find the moron who told you certificates were not of "fundamental importance" and give them a slap for feeding you a pile of bollocks.
ADK Posted 8 July 2012 Posted 8 July 2012 Alot of gyms are run by councils at pretty reasonable rates. I would say there are very good arguements for subsidising gyms. Its one thing being conservative but promoting a fitter, better educated workforce is good however you look at it.
Saxondale Posted 8 July 2012 Posted 8 July 2012 Find the moron who told you certificates were not of "fundamental importance" and give them a slap for feeding you a pile of bollocks. This is in relation to your suggestion that "there is a very marked difference to being well-qualified and well-educated", which I actually agree with. Qualifications being the certificates themselves and education being something that people can undertake themselves.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.