- Sep 21, 2018
- Joined SLU
- July 2007
- SLU Posts
There's at least a few well-off people who sent their kids to normal schools, mostly celebrities from working-class backgrounds who felt it violated their principles or whatever. The rich *could* pay more taxes and get everyone a better education, but they go to great lengths to avoid doing that. They'd rather just push up their own kid, in which case it actually helps them that most people aren't given an elite education because the competition won't be as fierce. And you can't overlook the networking aspect of private schools, where they make friends who will later loan them a million pounds or invest in their business. It's not just smaller class sizes and more qualified teachers, the entire system is rigged to favour the rich.Tutoring and private schools isn't cheating, though. It's just better education. Of all the ways rich people use their money that can be criticized, I honestly don't think paying for a better education is one of them.
I mean sure, the fact that rich people as a general set have access to higher-quality education than non-rich people is a problem that ought to be fixed; but on the individual level, what kind of parent who has that option for their child deliberately refuses to take it?
You can get to Harvard/Oxbridge/wherever from a working-class background with one parent and state schooling, but it's a lot (A LOT) harder and less likely and you still won't have all the advantages of networks, confidence, fancy schooling on your CV, and the general sense that you deserve to have all the money and rule the world. The "just better education" is part of the system that keeps the rich rich and the poor poor.