Oxford sued for wealth discrimination: Applicant can't afford 'luxury lifestyle'

Originally posted by WormwoodSquirm
If he or she can't afford a glass of wine he has no hope in hell of successfully suing Oxford

edit on 22-1-2013 by WormwoodSquirm because: gender

Actually, if he cannot afford the wine he should stick to water. This is a non story. He can go to Oxford University, but he does not need to join in with all the tradition, parties and so on. He's just spoilt.

Regards

Originally posted by 1nquisitive
reply to post by burdman30ott6

 

Whilst I agree with your point, they can deny/grant access to whoever they want, it must be mentioned that Oxford ISN'T private.

Oxford is a public funded university.

And for the record being able to pay your tuition is a perfectly acceptable prerequisite!

No it is not. It keeps the rich families rich and the poor families poor. Any schooling should be free. Especially considering how easily a degree can become null and void with any little incident that may or may not be your fault.

Originally posted by 1nquisitive
reply to post by burdman30ott6

 

Whilst I agree with your point, they can deny/grant access to whoever they want, it must be mentioned that Oxford ISN'T private.

Oxford is a public funded university.

And for the record being able to pay your tuition is a perfectly acceptable prerequisite!

One would only say that if one happened to be part of the social strata that would be able to afford it, or has simply failed to recognise the enormous error in the machinery of education as it stands today. Factually speaking, the system as it is corrodes our nations intellectual content. It denies people who live on thier wits, the ability to further themselves unless they have vast sums of free capital.

While I am sure that the vast majority of applicants who do reach univserity by whatever means, deserve to be there, the system as it is prevents those who do not fit into the narrow social strata of affluence, from taking advantage of the best education available. This is neither just, nor sustainable. I am not suggesting that every single waif and stray that walks up to the door of Oxfords admissions office ought to be automatically furnished with access to its vast wealth of learning, but I am adamant that there are people in this country who would benifit from university education, but are unable to partake of it for purely financial reasons, and nothing good can come of this.

The only way to improve a nation, is to spread information around, so that those who might make good use of it may, and by so doing improve the lives of all who dwell within it. The universities should find a way to include any and all applicants from every background, as long as they have the intellect to withstand the educational process. There can be no where to hide on this issue. Those who can pay ought to, and those who cannot, ought not be held back for that reason alone.

Factually speaking, the system as it is corrodes our nations intellectual content. It denies people who live on thier wits, the ability to further themselves unless they have vast sums of free capital.

1. You provided no facts, so rather you should have said "Anecdotally speaking...", as opposed to "Factually speaking".

2. What do you mean by this "...free capital..."? And regardless of your meaning, you criticise "free capital" but propagate free education, this is contradictory.

Originally posted by NarrowGate

Originally posted by 1nquisitive
reply to post by burdman30ott6

 

Whilst I agree with your point, they can deny/grant access to whoever they want, it must be mentioned that Oxford ISN'T private.

Oxford is a public funded university.

And for the record being able to pay your tuition is a perfectly acceptable prerequisite!

No it is not.

Yes it is.

It keeps the rich families rich and the poor families poor. Any schooling should be free. Especially considering how easily a degree can become null and void with any little incident that may or may not be your fault.

As for "free schooling" please see my earlier post regarding the fact that when X receives something for free Y has to pay. Please refer to it accurately, namely "making somebody else pay" as opposed to "free".

Originally posted by 1nquisitive

Originally posted by signalfire

ALL education should be free. It's all available for the reading and effort necessary at any library or on the internet

So you're willing to FORCE me to teach you for free? You do realise there is no such thing as "free", don't you? EVERYTHING has a cost.

Every economic action has an opportunity cost, time cost, etc etc

edit on 22-1-2013 by 1nquisitive because: typo

edit on 22-1-2013 by 1nquisitive because: more typos

Originally posted by Heisenberg59
Who cares? It's all a scam anyway to get you into to debt before you even have a job to pay it back. Even more so now with college grads ending up working at walmart. Be your own man and stop thinking that playing by the rules is going to get you ahead in life.

I take it you've been no where near a college in years, if ever.
The fact is kids with good grades will find a good job.
So many kids are wasting their time partying, and end up barely getting Cs.

I can't afford a downpayment on a penthouse in manhattan either, but there are plenty of other options for an apartment.

There will always be high end options for anything that are priced out of the price range of many people,.

So of the £21,082 the college requires in cash to be accepted, £12,900 is living fees.

Requiring an extra £12,900 even if your living fees only cost £1,000 a year is kinda absurd. Especially since they don't count earnings from a part time job.

Colleges shouldn't care about how much you pay for a place to bunk, all they should care about is if you can cover the tuition and books.

At the college i when to, all they cared about was that you paid for the semester within the first week that classes started. I could probably count on 1 hand the number of classes where I even had to open the book to pass the class.

reply to post by 1nquisitive


IM pretty sure they meant through taxes you would get paid, heh? Jumping the gun there a bit.

Like national healthcare there should be national college education so our country isn't full of complete dumb asses like we have running the country now.

And besides, who says you are a good enough teacher to get paid!!! Or how much ^^ j/k

Originally posted by 1nquisitive

Factually speaking, the system as it is corrodes our nations intellectual content. It denies people who live on thier wits, the ability to further themselves unless they have vast sums of free capital.

1. You provided no facts, so rather you should have said "Anecdotally speaking...", as opposed to "Factually speaking".

2. What do you mean by this "...free capital..."? And regardless of your meaning, you criticise "free capital" but propagate free education, this is contradictory.

1. He was speaking the truth, you would have to know a few of these people before you could understand, and it would appear you do not because you are a college graduate - who likely hangs with other college grads. The smarter people in society are often not college grads and never get rich.

2. It means extra money, that much is obvious given the context. You are being intellectually dishonest.

Originally posted by 1nquisitive

Originally posted by NarrowGate

Originally posted by 1nquisitive
reply to post by burdman30ott6

 

Whilst I agree with your point, they can deny/grant access to whoever they want, it must be mentioned that Oxford ISN'T private.

Oxford is a public funded university.

And for the record being able to pay your tuition is a perfectly acceptable prerequisite!

No it is not.

Yes it is.

It keeps the rich families rich and the poor families poor. Any schooling should be free. Especially considering how easily a degree can become null and void with any little incident that may or may not be your fault.

As for "free schooling" please see my earlier post regarding the fact that when X receives something for free Y has to pay. Please refer to it accurately, namely "making somebody else pay" as opposed to "free".

Originally posted by 1nquisitive

Originally posted by signalfire

ALL education should be free. It's all available for the reading and effort necessary at any library or on the internet

So you're willing to FORCE me to teach you for free? You do realise there is no such thing as "free", don't you? EVERYTHING has a cost.

Every economic action has an opportunity cost, time cost, etc etc

edit on 22-1-2013 by 1nquisitive because: typo

edit on 22-1-2013 by 1nquisitive because: more typos

The schooling should be free, and paid for with the kickbacks politicians get from lobbyists, and the profits the corporations make off of this unethical practice.

Heres a for instance, all of the money the politicians in Detroit stole should go to the schools, and not a single person should have to pay to attend.

Yes, I am saying the 1% and up should pay for it. That is what I am saying. I know, let me guess, you disagree and feel that they "earned it" ok have fun with that logic. Basically, what I am saying here, is the rich should share more with the poor for the benefit of society.
]



eta: oh and they should also stop calling people lazy etc etc, they have no idea what it is like in the next persons shoes. But hey, the richest man from Mexico says we all need to work harder and retire later when he was the richest man in the world. I guess you are taking his side?

Originally posted by babybunnies
I can't afford a downpayment on a penthouse in manhattan either, but there are plenty of other options for an apartment.

There will always be high end options for anything that are priced out of the price range of many people,.

Well don't jump the gun and start asking for progress or anything crazy like that....

I am not saying become communists, I am saying love your brothers and sisters and care about them.

reply to post by capone1


I dropped uut of school at 17, became a hairdresser until I was 21 and am now working my dream job making close to $70,000 a year- this is all without an 'education' per say. I live a comfotable life- I don't need the most expensive things, but in saying that- IF I wanted them I could afford them.

I'm 23- I plan on going to uni at the end of this year. Untill then, I'm happy being on 70K a year.

I don't understand why people waste their youth slammed under debt and feeling pressured at school/uni/tafe etc. I have no regrets and feel that all the choices I've made (good or bad) have brought me to where I am today. I am proud of myself and feel that if I had of stayed in school, then went to uni straight away, I would have missed out on some of the best years of my life.

There is always another path- and the one I've taken is something I think a lot of people should do as well, not only for sanity but for personal growth.

Originally posted by NarrowGate

Originally posted by 1nquisitive

Factually speaking, the system as it is corrodes our nations intellectual content. It denies people who live on thier wits, the ability to further themselves unless they have vast sums of free capital.

1. You provided no facts, so rather you should have said "Anecdotally speaking...", as opposed to "Factually speaking".

2. What do you mean by this "...free capital..."? And regardless of your meaning, you criticise "free capital" but propagate free education, this is contradictory.

1. He was speaking the truth, you would have to know a few of these people before you could understand, and it would appear you do not because you are a college graduate - who likely hangs with other college grads. The smarted people in society are often not college grads and never get rich.

2. It means extra money, that much is obvious given the context. You are being intellectually dishonest.

You know nothing about me yet you assume so much.

Originally posted by samuel1990
reply to post by capone1

 

I dropped uut of school at 17, became a hairdresser until I was 21 and am now working my dream job making close to $70,000 a year- this is all without an 'education' per say. I live a comfotable life- I don't need the most expensive things, but in saying that- IF I wanted them I could afford them.

I'm 23- I plan on going to uni at the end of this year. Untill then, I'm happy being on 70K a year.

I don't understand why people waste their youth slammed under debt and feeling pressured at school/uni/tafe etc. I have no regrets and feel that all the choices I've made (good or bad) have brought me to where I am today. I am proud of myself and feel that if I had of stayed in school, then went to uni straight away, I would have missed out on some of the best years of my life.

There is always another path- and the one I've taken is something I think a lot of people should do as well, not only for sanity but for personal growth.

If only more people had your common sense and gumption. I salute you.

reply to post by NarrowGate

schooling should be free

Nothing is 'free', every action has a cost.

Originally posted by 1nquisitive
reply to post by NarrowGate

 

schooling should be free

Nothing is 'free', every action has a cost.

I take it you are throwing in the towel? OK.

Did you miss the part about..... you know what never mind...

You are a teacher? Glad I am not paying to go to school right now. We need a higher caliber of teachers!

reply to post by 1nquisitive


OK :dodge the points.

Sorry I just realized you are siding with the wealthy, the smallest part of society. Considering you are not likely to be wealthy being a teacher and all....well you get the point.

reply to post by Heisenberg59


You're right there speaking as a former sheep and the sad part is these "universities" take your money or the governments and can't guarantee you a job in your field of choice. It's these corporations too, they don't wish to make a loyal employee of you by training you and giving you a chance to go from the bottom to the top.