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

Originally posted by NarrowGate
reply to post by capone1

 

It's not all good. You have to demand change or it will not happen. What is the difference between 20 and 60k a year? and yes they have you by the balls. I already explained how and you did not refute that FACT. Yes you have some misconstrued statistics that have been around for ever and beaten into your head since you were 2.

The difference is 40k. See, my degree did help my math skills.

Originally posted by NarrowGate
reply to post by capone1

 

I would rather be homeless than serve the tyrants that control the money in this world. The ones that brainwashed us all from birth. These families have been around for a while now maybe you should look into it? Their tricks haven't much changed either. They seem to have this system locked into peoples minds as acceptable. Well, I guess even a Nazi soldier needs money for car house and all that right?

Your points are invalid you do see that right? We are being fooled. Follow the money, don't listen to illuminati blah blah blah just follow the money. It's some BS where it all ends up.

I want to have kids and own a house. Can't be homeless for that.

Originally posted by capone1

Originally posted by NarrowGate
reply to post by capone1

 

It's not all good. You have to demand change or it will not happen. What is the difference between 20 and 60k a year? and yes they have you by the balls. I already explained how and you did not refute that FACT. Yes you have some misconstrued statistics that have been around for ever and beaten into your head since you were 2.

The difference is 40k. See, my degree did help my math skills.

Too bad they made sure you would never be able to think for yourself. Was it worth the extra 40k? Trust me when I say, many would agree if your answer is yes.

The difference is simply that - more worthless currency that can provide worldly comforts but does not benefit the ones who will come after we die. That counts more than any of our "happiness."

We are living in a world where around 80% of the population is suffering because the .1% are hoarding all of the money. Not the 1%, the .1%.

If your financial stability is more important than protesting this tyrannical domination that has been effect for centuries now...well IDK what to tell you.

reply to post by capone1


I have a wife kid dog house and no degree. Plenty of time to post on forums too. The house is not payed off, but I could have bought about 2 or 3 houses for what we payed for it already.

eta; for the record, I would still rather be homeless even with them than not protest this evil.

Yes it is worth it. I can have a family and live in a house. At the same time, I can speak my dislike for the 2 party system, convince many to support Ron Paul and his views, spread the message of corruption -- I'm a member of ATS for heavens sake!!
Best of both worlds in my opinion.

Originally posted by capone1
Yes it is worth it. I can have a family and live in a house. At the same time, I can speak my dislike for the 2 party system, convince many to support Ron Paul and his views, spread the message of corruption -- I'm a member of ATS for heavens sake!!

Best of both worlds in my opinion.

Well I can have a family and live in a house, and do. At the same time I can speak my dislike for the 2 party system, convince many to support God and His Law, and spread the Good News which inherently destroys corruption - I am a member of God's Church for goodness sake!!

best way to go imho.

eta; did I mention I can do this all without a degree or a 50k a year plus job? Of course, the system doesn't like anomalies so I have to be sure not to step on any toes. Good thing that is easy for me, because I fight this war in the realm of ideology.

Originally posted by NarrowGate

Originally posted by capone1
Yes it is worth it. I can have a family and live in a house. At the same time, I can speak my dislike for the 2 party system, convince many to support Ron Paul and his views, spread the message of corruption -- I'm a member of ATS for heavens sake!!

Best of both worlds in my opinion.

Well I can have a family and live in a house, and do. At the same time I can speak my dislike for the 2 party system, convince many to support God and His Law, and spread the Good News which inherently destroys corruption - I am a member of God's Church for goodness sake!!

best way to go imho.

That's great brother and I support you 100%.

reply to post by capone1


I support you too brother, which is why I am trying so hard to show you the error that we all fall into at some point in our lives. I support you and your well being 100% along with your descendants.

Originally posted by NarrowGate
reply to post by capone1

 

I support you too brother, which is why I am trying so hard to show you the error that we all fall into at some point in our lives. I support you and your well being 100% along with your descendants.

Likewise, and I appreciate your kindness and concern. Different strokes for different folks.

reply to post by capone1


Seems to me it is a bit more complex than that, but people do love to make life simple. It's just that....life is not so simple.

But, imho you have most of the battle won from what I can tell. Just gotta let go of that last piece of complacency when it comes to the actual shaping of the future. We can do it, or we can do what we have always done and let the same families do it that have been doing it for centuries.

eta; they are not doing a good job....

Is this a case of a major University insuring payment or is it indeed a case of elitism at its best?

"Dining" has a slightly different meaning in this kind of context. It isn't about going out to fancy restaurants or expensive meals.

I had to attend mandatory dining sessions (not Oxford, just to be clear) to complete my qualifications. It was about developing and maintaining a collegiate atmosphere, engaging with the Masters of the profession on a more equal footing, networking, developing relationships and identifying professional opportunities. It was also about maintaining a tradition that underpins our profession - and drinking. Though admittedly drinking is also a tradition that underpins our profession

If you've ever seen Harry Potter and the dining room scenes, long tables and benches set out with everyone wearing robes, the Benchers sitting across the top bench... it's exactly like that. I would imagine the Oxford colleges might have something similar.

There are lots of good school with clever teachers. If you're going to Oxford, it's because you want the combination of the quality with the history and tradition - and the kudos that goes with that history and tradition. If you don't want the tradition then there are plenty of cheaper alternatives that will still give you a good quality education.

Why should we bring everything down to the lowest common denominator just because one person is annoyed that he can't have everything and anything he wants in life?

Originally posted by NarrowGate
College is a complete scam btw.... just because you can make money off the scheme does not make it something other than a scheme.

That's like claiming a car is a "scam" because it can't fly. The car is an excellent tool for driving, it's the people who are telling you that it can fly who are scamming you.

The university system was designed to be abstract, it was designed to encourage deep thought and navel gazing. It wasn't designed to teach people how to do a specific job. People shouldn't be surprised if they leave university with a degree but no practical idea of how to work in their chosen profession - that was never the point of the system.

Originally posted by EvillerBob

Originally posted by NarrowGate
College is a complete scam btw.... just because you can make money off the scheme does not make it something other than a scheme.

That's like claiming a car is a "scam" because it can't fly. The car is an excellent tool for driving, it's the people who are telling you that it can fly who are scamming you.

The university system was designed to be abstract, it was designed to encourage deep thought and navel gazing. It wasn't designed to teach people how to do a specific job. People shouldn't be surprised if they leave university with a degree but no practical idea of how to work in their chosen profession - that was never the point of the system.

Ahh, you are correct. It is indeed what it has been for hundreds of years though, is it not?

eta; I can know just as much as the man with a degree, but the man with the degree is "legitimized" because he has shown himself to be obedient and punctual over a number of years. A good drone in essence. Unless he is of extraordinary intelligence and breezed through college with no effort and a lot of drinking - of course depending on what he is going for.

In this day and age, we do not need the university to promote deep though. What is navel gazing?

I can learn just as much online or at the library as I can at the university. Difference being, like I said before, I can weed through the propaganda and not work off of false pretenses if I do it on my own. I can also learn what I want when I want, which will put my specific talents to the most use in society. That is, if society allows .

reply to post by 1nquisitive


A persons ability to absorb learning, is not a matter of how large thier credit facility might happen to be. In the long term, it will cost this country an awful lot more to fail to educate those who can benifit from it, than ever it stands to loose by educating those who cannot "afford" it.

That a persons ability to advance themselves intellectually relies on thier ability to provide vast sums of money to an institution is frankly broken, and unsustainable.

Originally posted by TrueBrit
reply to post by 1nquisitive

 

A persons ability to absorb learning, is not a matter of how large thier credit facility might happen to be. In the long term, it will cost this country an awful lot more to fail to educate those who can benifit from it, than ever it stands to loose by educating those who cannot "afford" it.

That a persons ability to advance themselves intellectually relies on thier ability to provide vast sums of money to an institution is frankly broken, and unsustainable.

There are plenty of good (and some say better) Universities that don't come with the same price tag. With some you are paying extra for the tradition and the name that comes with them. Insisting on going to that University while stripping out the tradition is akin to a vegan ordering the all-you-can-eat Steak Platter then insisting they serve it without any meat. What the heck is the point in ordering it then?

He can advance himself perfectly well at any of the many fine academic institutions in this country. Some are better than others, true, but there are more names than just Oxford or Cambridge that carry a lot of weight without all the frippery and fancy traditions.

If you buy a Ferrari you are buying for the badge, not because it is a practical choice. You can't cry that you need to accelerate from 0-60 in a fraction of a nanosecond. You might well want to - and there's nothing wrong with doing it because you want to - but it's a matter of vanity and if you cannot afford it then save up or buy something that is within your budget. The guy in the article - to extend this analogy to torturous lengths - is complaining that he wants a top-of-the-range Ferrari when he can only afford a top-of-the-range Mercedes.

A Ferrari is nothing like a university education. All a Ferrari does for you, is get you round corners and down roads faster than a greased ferret down a rabbit hole.

A university education however, is not a bauble, or a luxury item in truth. Since all of us human beings, have a responsibility to ourselves and to each other, to make ourselves into the best we can be, if a person has the intellect to gain a university education, they have a social responsibility to actually do so. If the course they need to do can only be offered by a top flight university, then the student must not come up against unreasonable stumbling blocks, on his or her approach to that education.

If anything else is maintained as the prevailing condition, then the only inference one can take from that, is that only the very well off have the right to take advantage of a decent education. If you are telling me that people should merely knuckle under and accept this utterly unacceptable state of affairs, I would point out to you that allowing prejudice to go un-punished, un-challenged, is something which no one in a democracy ought to be asked to do.

This is a matter of equality. Nothing else. If the son of a Lord can go to Oxford, then the son of a sales assistant at a local supermarket should be able to do the same thing, without being prevented from doing so, just because thier bank account is less than over flowing.

I havent read through all the comments but Im from England, when about too start high school my grandma popped her clogs and left all of her money too my mother to pay for private education through out high school (4k a term)

There were 2 groups in my school, those that got picked up in daddys Bentley when the bell rung and those that really lived very normal lives. The more popular of this elite group would constantly talk down to us and it was disgusting. Fortunately we played rugby half the year and we sure made them pay

My school however couldnt have cared less for the pupil as long as the money was paid. I had 150 people in my year, 30 of those atleast were from Asia and lived on the school grounds. They could barely speak a word of English.

This fellow I believe has every right to attend that college, I heard a debate on TV the other day and they spoke about in England the decline in middle class white people attending University and how more disadvantaged black teenagers from England should have the opportunity to attend. This I disagree with, some of our Universities are renowned worldwide for there quality, these should be for the most intelligent and capable, not for some guy to have this equality charts look pretty.

Originally posted by HTUKno1
This fellow I believe has every right to attend that college.

And he has every right and he has been accepted, he just doesn't want to pay for it. He can also get an excellent education at many fine Universities in the UK. He is not even being denied this education. He has been offered the service he wants but he is unwilling to pay the price tag that comes with it.

I'd love a big mansion with acres of land and an indoor swimming pool. If I can't afford it, what would you advise? How about picking a perfectly serviceable property that still meets all my needs (but without the swanky luxury features) and is within my budget? Or perhaps look at sourcing the money another way - save up longer, get a better job, sell off some stuff, etc.

If this guy is good enough to be there but can't afford it, there are several sources of funding and scholarships that will help him for exactly this reason - encouraging people from lower income brackets. If you have genuine ability, the resources will be found to help.

Originally posted by TrueBrit

...Since all of us human beings, have a responsibility to ourselves and to each other, to make ourselves into the best we can be, if a person has the intellect to gain a university education, they have a social responsibility to actually do so. If the course they need to do can only be offered by a top flight university, then the student must not come up against unreasonable stumbling blocks, on his or her approach to that education...

No, absolutely not. Neither he nor I nor you have any obligation to society of that sort. To hear someone suggest otherwise is actually rather... chilling. I do rather hope you never hold a position of any influence.

reply to post by EvillerBob


So you are saying, that it is absolutely fine, in your opinion, that people should squander thier intellectual resources? You think having a system in place to ensure that a large number of people do just that, every single year is ok?

Im glad I dont hold a position of influence as well. I was denied the option of a decent education, and got instead a primary school full of thugs, followed by a five year stint at a secondary school which was basically a five year knife fight, that I turned up to unarmed every day. That is hardly likely to produce the level of education required to perform the sheer amount of paperwork involved in high office.

However, my moral and ethical composition are as sound as they can possibly be, and I am better placed to know the rights and wrongs of this issue, because I have been affected by education inequality in a very comprehensive way. Those who are not personally familiar with that psychological territory are hardly likely to be able to speak from expirience on that type of issue.