It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

THE RICH can now just buy their way through Education in the UK

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 9 2011 @ 06:18 PM
link   
www.guardian.co.uk...
At a time when the government of the UK has cut over 10,000 university places and INCREASED fees to £9000 ($15,000) a year (excluding living and incidental expenses), they reward us by granting Rich kids to buy into any university they want regardless of merit.

In times like these it just re-affirms my beliefs that the New World World is far from conspiracy. Its happening right in front of our very eyes.



Teenagers from the wealthiest families would be able to pay for extra places at the most competitive universities under government proposals that could allow institutions to charge some British students the same high fees as overseas undergraduates. Candidates who take up the extra places would not be eligible for publicly funded loans to pay tuition fees or living costs, limiting this option to all but the most privileged households who could pay fees up front.
Under the plans, the extra students may be charged as much as international undergraduates. At the most competitive universities, these students face fees ranging from £12,000 a year for arts subjects to £18,000 for sciences and more than £28,000 for medicine. Applicants would be required to meet the course entry requirements.

The changes would give more students the chance to attend their first choice of university. At present, the government sets a quota of undergraduate places that English universities are allowed to offer each year.

Employers and charities will also be encouraged to sponsor "off-quota" places under the plans to be outlined in a higher education white paper in the summer.

Ministers argue that the creation of extra places will boost social mobility by freeing up more publicly subsidised places for undergraduates from poorer homes.

But the proposals are likely to be criticised as a means for the wealthiest to "buy places" at a time when the government is to cut 10,000 publicly funded places.

The universities minister, David Willetts, told the Guardian: "There are various important issues that need to be addressed around off-quota places, but I start from the view that an increase in the total number of higher education places could aid social mobility.

"There would need to be arrangements to make sure any such system was fair and worked in the interests of students as well as institutions. But it is not clear what the benefit is of the current rules, which, for example, limit the ability of charities or social enterprises to sponsor students.

"We are inviting ideas on the whole concept and we will listen very carefully to all the responses we receive."

The proposal is most likely to be taken up by highly selective institutions, which turn away thousands of qualified candidates a year. Oxford accepted slightly more than 3,000 British and EU undergraduates out of about 17,000 who applied for the current academic year.

That demand is due to intensify as the latest application figures show the number of candidates for this autumn has risen by 2.1% to about 633,000 – another record high.

The places may not be covered by access agreements, under which universities are required to outline how they will improve their proportion of students from state schools and deprived backgrounds.

Under one version of the scheme, universities might operate a "needs-blind" admissions process, which assesses all candidates regardless of their ability to pay, but then offers places off-quota to candidates from the most privileged homes.



edit on 9-5-2011 by CasiusIgnoranze because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-5-2011 by CasiusIgnoranze because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 9 2011 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by CasiusIgnoranze
 


That explains all the idiots in high places. Dont worry, the sun is setting on them, they are withering and will soon fall away..



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 06:25 PM
link   
Pssshhh what do you mean they can NOW do it? They've ALWAYS done it. It's just publicly talked about now.

Seriously... How do you think half of them get the education and jobs they do? It's not what you know, it's who you know, and how much you have.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Jomina
 


I know. It ain't official till it's reported by the mainstream media.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 06:32 PM
link   
No wonder there are so many stupid doctors that only tell you which chemical drugs to take



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by BanMePlz
 


Sun is setting on them? More like sun is forever shinning on them. I just hope in the events of a mass uprisal, we do not slip into communism instead. The last thing we need is another China...
edit on 9-5-2011 by CasiusIgnoranze because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 06:45 PM
link   
reply to post by CasiusIgnoranze
 


Always been that way.

That is until the last Labour government tried to make it so that if you could 'nearly' spell your name then you almost automatically qualified for a degree in English Literature or some other subject of your choice!

Maybe now we can start getting some decent standards back into the UK education system.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 06:55 PM
link   
Oh get a life man.

University IS business more than it is education.

The real world is out there if you look for it.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 06:56 PM
link   
The whole education system is a scam anyway, it's about securing obedience more than anything. Think about it, if a person is in 40 grand debt then they aren't exactly gonna make a fuss in the workplace, much less go on strike or anything like that. Debt is the ultimate tool of the establishment, it's what keeps our society in chains and the elite in power.

"They think perhaps the safest thing to do is take orders and hope for the best" - Tony Benn
edit on 9-5-2011 by lifeissacred because: (no reason given)



edit on 9-5-2011 by lifeissacred because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 07:02 PM
link   
reply to post by lifeissacred
 


Brilliant explanation!



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 07:11 PM
link   
This is true in the USA too.

It's ok if you fail a few times, as long as you got another 25 grand $ to keep the ball rolling, you can come to class next semester it's no biggy!

And I agree it has been this way a long time.

And yes it does explain why we have so many idiots in high places. It's really sad.

Here is what I learned in College. I realized it wasn't about Academics at all. It was about money and obedience and following orders when told.

I discovered the Library is free, and you can actually learn infinite things from these places. You will learn more hanging out in a Library for a few weeks than you will getting your Masters over years of time. Also, I personally think a lot of the chicks at the Library are hot.

So win-win.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by lifeissacred
 


Ahh yes, that will be the same Lord Antony Wedgewood Benn that helped his son get onto the UK political gravy train at great expense to the taxpayer.

After funding his good education of course. Check out the Wiki for Hillary Benn ( his son).

Another Labour Champagne Socialist politician!

I will give him credit for giving Concorde the go ahead though.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 08:05 PM
link   
reply to post by petethespark
 


Lord Tony Benn? He campaigned to renounce his title and be elected to the house of commons and I'm pretty sure he campaigned to abolish the house of lords also. Not exactly a very 'champagne socialist' action. He's a true socialist, he's consistent and honest unlike most politicians nowadays. He's one of the few people at the moment who I'd say is worthy of being prime minister, it's a shame there aren't many life in the labour party like him otherwise they might be worth voting for.

edit on 9-5-2011 by lifeissacred because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 08:33 PM
link   
reply to post by lifeissacred
 


I have heard it said more than once that Tony Benn may have been the best prime minister that we'd never had. Although he does come from a wealthier background that does not in itself change the fact that he does seem unusually honest for a polititian. On the other hand being honest to one's principles is probably not a good thing if you want to make it to the top in government. Towing the party line is what seems to matter most.

As to the education system, the wealthy have always had access to better schools, etc. although nowadays it seems that every Tom, Dick and Harry does a uni degree before setting off on their career in burger flipping or shelf stacking. More vocational course at local collages is what we need.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by lifeissacred
 


I respect and admire Tony Benn in many ways. I have heard him speak and debate many times over the past 30 odd years and I agree with a lot of what he says.

BUT, and this ties in with the OP, like almost everyone with the means when it came to his own children he made sure they had the best he could get them, regardless of his politics. Human nature and perfectly understandable but definately, in some measure, hypocrytical.

I mention Tony Benn purely in response to your quote but it is not difficult to find 'Socialist' politicians preaching one thing to the masses and then sending their children to private school for a 'decent' education.

It is not the fact they do it that bothers me, it is the hypocrasy!

I think that speaks volumes about our education system in the UK.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 08:50 PM
link   
Actually my friend who's with me now tells me that in the 70s, Benn would often address union rallies here in Bristol. He would be driven here in a very flash limo or something, but would get out about 2 blocks away so that he could be seen to be walking there like everyone else. That does seem a bit like someone trying to be something they're not.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 09:09 PM
link   
reply to post by CasiusIgnoranze
 


this is just a part of what i am beginning to notice more and more. it is not about anything anymore other than who has the money or who can spend the most, obviously the richest win everytime in this scenerio, it a bit how the premier league is run, he who can spend more wins.

there was a time where if you were good at something you were destined to become something, now it seems we have moved more and more away from that and into whoever can afford it or can spend the most. it is no longer about talent or scouting/spotting talent, it is just about how much money you can spend to make it.

apply it to anything, i am noticing it, maybe i am seeing things that are not there, but they sure do seem like it.
qualifications are also needed for more and more things now to, and to get the qualifications for the HIGHER paid jobs you need to beable to afford the fee's to begin with. it does not matter if you are talented at it or could of done a better job or would of made an excellent whatever, you cannot afford to put up the cash, you get relegated.

sorry for using football terms, it is the only way i can explain what i mean in a way that puts it across.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 09:33 PM
link   
reply to post by lifeform11
 


It's not that long ago where the only way you could learn to read and write is either by having a family member that was lucky enough to have an education sit with you for hours every night after you came home from working 12-14 hours in a factory or field, your parents spend their lifetime savings on your education hoping it will lift you up the ladder or you have a benefactor that leaves you money in a will to pay for your education.

Either way, all through history, education has always been highly valued and seen as a way to 'better' yourself.


edit on 9-5-2011 by petethespark because: spelling!



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 09:46 PM
link   
reply to post by petethespark
 


i agree, but what about those who were naturally talented they did'nt need to read and write to be talented at something, they seemed to be scouted by those in need of them, if they had a great mind they would work their way to the top, stand out, be took on. now it is like "yes you would make a great...... but you would need the qualification or lessons or classes which cost $$$$$, oh you don't have it? o'well nevermind"

it seems these days people just pay their way through to become whatever now. if you cannot afford to pay for something you no longer make it, i am not saying it never happens, just that we are moving more towards those who can afford to become whatever, and away from spotting potential and encouraging it.

the only other way i can explain it is by using a tribe as an example, the hunters are the best of the lot, they are the best hunters, the ones who excel at it, it makes logical sense.

today it is more like "who can afford to be a hunter? you, you and you, ok the rest of you will have to make huts"



posted on May, 10 2011 @ 05:58 AM
link   
Notice how having a right-wing government means that education is now becoming more and more elitist?

RIGHT-WING GOVERNMENTS PRODUCE INEQUALITY. FACT.

Suck on that ATS.

The Revenant.



new topics




 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join