How long?
Aug 9th 2004, 1:38 am
#61
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jul 2004
Location: Victoria, BC Canada
Posts: 61,698
Re: How long?
Originally Posted by Glaswegian
The problems with increasing the number of school leavers in further education so they stay off welfare:
Its all about massaging the figures for the government.
There are only so many places in university on the 'useful/good' courses - therefore some other courses need to be established.
It used to be that only the top 10 to 20 percent were deemed bright enough to handle university - that automatically meant that the rest were more suited to other work. A levels used to mean that you could get a job.
In clearance you can find courses for students with very low grades. These kids are probably better suited to going straight into the workplace instead of three years at university getting debts and a degree that probably will not help them find a better paid job!
Yes, I agree (don't be shocked) that not all children are university material and if not - don't waste your money. However, I still maintain that if an working class family has a talented kid and need some help for post- secondary education - that's not a hand-out - that's all part of the system for people to use if necessary.
These kids with very low grades....how would they be able to find employment? are we assuming that they are not qualified for even trade school? what happens to them....do they end up on welfare?
The drop out rate has gone up a lot. A waste of time and money for all.
For the avoidance of doubt: Increasing the number of children in further education is not the same as retraining the unemployed. The latter has more of a useful purpose.
Its all about massaging the figures for the government.
There are only so many places in university on the 'useful/good' courses - therefore some other courses need to be established.
It used to be that only the top 10 to 20 percent were deemed bright enough to handle university - that automatically meant that the rest were more suited to other work. A levels used to mean that you could get a job.
In clearance you can find courses for students with very low grades. These kids are probably better suited to going straight into the workplace instead of three years at university getting debts and a degree that probably will not help them find a better paid job!
Yes, I agree (don't be shocked) that not all children are university material and if not - don't waste your money. However, I still maintain that if an working class family has a talented kid and need some help for post- secondary education - that's not a hand-out - that's all part of the system for people to use if necessary.
These kids with very low grades....how would they be able to find employment? are we assuming that they are not qualified for even trade school? what happens to them....do they end up on welfare?
The drop out rate has gone up a lot. A waste of time and money for all.
For the avoidance of doubt: Increasing the number of children in further education is not the same as retraining the unemployed. The latter has more of a useful purpose.
Aug 9th 2004, 1:51 am
#62
Cynically amused.
Joined: Oct 2002
Location: BC
Posts: 3,648
Re: How long?
[But, my point still stands - there is no reason that a "working class family" with talented kids should not take advantage of this money that has been made available (with our tax dollars) to make a better life for themselves. I certainly wouldn't deny my kids......would you deny your kids a chance at a post-education of any type because you didn't want anyone else to be responsible for them?
Scholarships are awarded on a patronage basis and are often determined ahead of time by the donor - my daughter could not attend a debate in New York because the scholarship (advertised and competed for by over 200 students) was already set to go to a student from a predominant ethnic group in Vancouver whose family were big in the community. I found out by chance as I got a copy of fax dated six weeks before the "competition" that contained the name of the "winner". Is that plain enough?
Not trying to be argumentative but I don't understand the problem with sending people on unemployment to university to make them able to contribute to society. In BC now people on welfare are being sent back to school to get them off welfare (with our tax dollars) and federally - people on unemployment on being re-educated to help them find jobs. Isn't that what's its all about? Am I missing a fundamental point here????
Yes, unfortunately you are. Re-training schemes in BC have less than a 2% success rate for the long term unemployed. Most retraining schemes in BC are covers for cheap exploitative labour, with no guarantee of a job at the end of it. Employers get paid by the government to hire these people for a set term (usually 14 weeks) and after that time they get laid off. During the time that they are "working" they are expected to do unpaid overtime and have no benefits, medical or dental coverage. But, in true BC style, these unemployed will temporarily disappear off the statistics, so that's alright then. Look at the timing - these courses are mainly offered through the winter and spring so that the seasonal "student hires" can be factored in and the skewed figures presented as "successful reductions in unemployment figures".
Scholarships are awarded on a patronage basis and are often determined ahead of time by the donor - my daughter could not attend a debate in New York because the scholarship (advertised and competed for by over 200 students) was already set to go to a student from a predominant ethnic group in Vancouver whose family were big in the community. I found out by chance as I got a copy of fax dated six weeks before the "competition" that contained the name of the "winner". Is that plain enough?
Not trying to be argumentative but I don't understand the problem with sending people on unemployment to university to make them able to contribute to society. In BC now people on welfare are being sent back to school to get them off welfare (with our tax dollars) and federally - people on unemployment on being re-educated to help them find jobs. Isn't that what's its all about? Am I missing a fundamental point here????
Yes, unfortunately you are. Re-training schemes in BC have less than a 2% success rate for the long term unemployed. Most retraining schemes in BC are covers for cheap exploitative labour, with no guarantee of a job at the end of it. Employers get paid by the government to hire these people for a set term (usually 14 weeks) and after that time they get laid off. During the time that they are "working" they are expected to do unpaid overtime and have no benefits, medical or dental coverage. But, in true BC style, these unemployed will temporarily disappear off the statistics, so that's alright then. Look at the timing - these courses are mainly offered through the winter and spring so that the seasonal "student hires" can be factored in and the skewed figures presented as "successful reductions in unemployment figures".
Last edited by dingbat; Aug 9th 2004 at 1:58 am.
Aug 9th 2004, 2:08 am
#63
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How long?
BC sounds a bit too "British" for comfort .... :scared:
Aug 9th 2004, 9:30 am
#64
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How long?
i found this post rather interesting.. i was born in montreal to italian parents. so therefore i am a child of landed immigrants. i never once had a problem with discrimination at school or anywhere else for that matter. i went to school with people from a variety of different social and ethnic backgrounds. most of whose parents were also immigrants. i didnt go onto university, i settled with a technical degree instead. but i knew many who went onto university with no problems. true, university is expensive in canada. (even though ive been in the uk for eight years now, im not sure how expensive university is in the uk) but the standard of living is much higher than the uk.
and i really dont understand what 'immigrant trap' is supposed to be?
and i really dont understand what 'immigrant trap' is supposed to be?
Aug 9th 2004, 10:40 am
#65
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jul 2004
Location: Victoria, BC Canada
Posts: 61,698
Re: How long?
Originally Posted by dingbat
[But, my point still stands - there is no reason that a "working class family" with talented kids should not take advantage of this money that has been made available (with our tax dollars) to make a better life for themselves. I certainly wouldn't deny my kids......would you deny your kids a chance at a post-education of any type because you didn't want anyone else to be responsible for them?
Scholarships are awarded on a patronage basis and are often determined ahead of time by the donor - my daughter could not attend a debate in New York because the scholarship (advertised and competed for by over 200 students) was already set to go to a student from a predominant ethnic group in Vancouver whose family were big in the community. I found out by chance as I got a copy of fax dated six weeks before the "competition" that contained the name of the "winner". Is that plain enough?
First, I'm sorry that your daughter didn't receive the scholarship that I'm sure she rightfully deserved. i'm sur it was a very frustrating time for everyone involved.
I don't think it accurate to make such generalizations about scholarships. My brother's 2 nieces' both received scholarships to UBC and believe me there was no patronage involved.....such alot of hard work on the part of the kids. As well, in Victoria there are other families that I know whose kids have received scholarships for one of the universities in BC and no patronage was involved. I'm sure that there is patronage in every part of lfie to a certain extent - sometimes it "hits' closer to home than we're comfortable with.
Not trying to be argumentative but I don't understand the problem with sending people on unemployment to university to make them able to contribute to society. In BC now people on welfare are being sent back to school to get them off welfare (with our tax dollars) and federally - people on unemployment on being re-educated to help them find jobs. Isn't that what's its all about? Am I missing a fundamental point here????
Yes, unfortunately you are. Re-training schemes in BC have less than a 2% success rate for the long term unemployed. Most retraining schemes in BC are covers for cheap exploitative labour, with no guarantee of a job at the end of it. Employers get paid by the government to hire these people for a set term (usually 14 weeks) and after that time they get laid off. During the time that they are "working" they are expected to do unpaid overtime and have no benefits, medical or dental coverage. But, in true BC style, these unemployed will temporarily disappear off the statistics, so that's alright then. Look at the timing - these courses are mainly offered through the winter and spring so that the seasonal "student hires" can be factored in and the skewed figures presented as "successful reductions in unemployment figures".
Scholarships are awarded on a patronage basis and are often determined ahead of time by the donor - my daughter could not attend a debate in New York because the scholarship (advertised and competed for by over 200 students) was already set to go to a student from a predominant ethnic group in Vancouver whose family were big in the community. I found out by chance as I got a copy of fax dated six weeks before the "competition" that contained the name of the "winner". Is that plain enough?
First, I'm sorry that your daughter didn't receive the scholarship that I'm sure she rightfully deserved. i'm sur it was a very frustrating time for everyone involved.
I don't think it accurate to make such generalizations about scholarships. My brother's 2 nieces' both received scholarships to UBC and believe me there was no patronage involved.....such alot of hard work on the part of the kids. As well, in Victoria there are other families that I know whose kids have received scholarships for one of the universities in BC and no patronage was involved. I'm sure that there is patronage in every part of lfie to a certain extent - sometimes it "hits' closer to home than we're comfortable with.
Not trying to be argumentative but I don't understand the problem with sending people on unemployment to university to make them able to contribute to society. In BC now people on welfare are being sent back to school to get them off welfare (with our tax dollars) and federally - people on unemployment on being re-educated to help them find jobs. Isn't that what's its all about? Am I missing a fundamental point here????
Yes, unfortunately you are. Re-training schemes in BC have less than a 2% success rate for the long term unemployed. Most retraining schemes in BC are covers for cheap exploitative labour, with no guarantee of a job at the end of it. Employers get paid by the government to hire these people for a set term (usually 14 weeks) and after that time they get laid off. During the time that they are "working" they are expected to do unpaid overtime and have no benefits, medical or dental coverage. But, in true BC style, these unemployed will temporarily disappear off the statistics, so that's alright then. Look at the timing - these courses are mainly offered through the winter and spring so that the seasonal "student hires" can be factored in and the skewed figures presented as "successful reductions in unemployment figures".
Aug 9th 2004, 12:36 pm
#66
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How long?
Originally Posted by Velouria
i really dont understand what 'immigrant trap' is supposed to be?
During the latter half of the 20th century, the UK university system was opened to the masses - I didn't pay a penny to get my honours degree back in the 80's, although that's all changed now.
If you come from a country where that sort of opportunity still prety much open to all, even if there is now a modest price tag by Canadian standards, it's hard to accept that your current financial position in Canada won't support the same opportunity for your children.
It's good to hear that you didn't have any discrimination problems at school - my oldest kid certainly did at first, although the other kids seem to have accepted him now. But he wasn't born in Canada - you were born in Montreal, so I guess nobody could tell how many generations your family had been in Canada for?
Aug 9th 2004, 12:54 pm
#67
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How long?
Originally Posted by Glaswegian
That's an interesting comment - I'm becoming less convinced there is one too as time goes on. Most of it seems to be the result of a gear change after arriving - if your qualifications or experience can't get you a job, you'll suddenly find yourself in a whole different social & economic position.
During the latter half of the 20th century, the UK university system was opened to the masses - I didn't pay a penny to get my honours degree back in the 80's, although that's all changed now.
If you come from a country where that sort of opportunity still prety much open to all, even if there is now a modest price tag by Canadian standards, it's hard to accept that your current financial position in Canada won't support the same opportunity for your children.
It's good to hear that you didn't have any discrimination problems at school - my oldest kid certainly did at first, although the other kids seem to have accepted him now. But he wasn't born in Canada - you were born in Montreal, so I guess nobody could tell how many generations your family had been in Canada for?
During the latter half of the 20th century, the UK university system was opened to the masses - I didn't pay a penny to get my honours degree back in the 80's, although that's all changed now.
If you come from a country where that sort of opportunity still prety much open to all, even if there is now a modest price tag by Canadian standards, it's hard to accept that your current financial position in Canada won't support the same opportunity for your children.
It's good to hear that you didn't have any discrimination problems at school - my oldest kid certainly did at first, although the other kids seem to have accepted him now. But he wasn't born in Canada - you were born in Montreal, so I guess nobody could tell how many generations your family had been in Canada for?
canada was built on immigration, and that was so apparent when i was in school. i went to school with italians, greeks, asians, portuguese.. you name it! and if thats changed the eight years ive been away, then it will break my heart quite frankly. was the discrimination your oldest child faced just the fact that he had a different accent? or was it more serious? (im assuming we're also talking elementary school - but correct me if im wrong)
Aug 9th 2004, 1:07 pm
#68
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How long?
He was picked on by the other kids for having a different accent and wasn't very happy. I was getting the same crap at work at the time - lots of 'jokes' about bland UK food, my accent, etc - it gets you down and I pretty much assumed that's how Canadians behaved.
Life has moved on - we have the school system working for us now, both my kids are now coded as gifted and I've got a different job with a much better company.
Montreal is meant to be very cosmopolitan, I'd like to see it someday - Calgary has a lot of immigrants too (almost a milltion people had to come from somewhere first), but I wouldn't describe it as cosmopolitan.
Life has moved on - we have the school system working for us now, both my kids are now coded as gifted and I've got a different job with a much better company.
Montreal is meant to be very cosmopolitan, I'd like to see it someday - Calgary has a lot of immigrants too (almost a milltion people had to come from somewhere first), but I wouldn't describe it as cosmopolitan.
Aug 9th 2004, 1:12 pm
#69
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How long?
Originally Posted by Glaswegian
He was picked on by the other kids for having a different accent and wasn't very happy. I was getting the same crap at work at the time - lots of 'jokes' about bland UK food, my accent, etc - it gets you down and I pretty much assumed that's how Canadians behaved.
Life has moved on - we have the school system working for us now, both my kids are now coded as gifted and I've got a different job with a much better company.
Montreal is meant to be very cosmopolitan, I'd like to see it someday - Calgary has a lot of immigrants too (almost a milltion people had to come from somewhere first), but I wouldn't describe it as cosmopolitan.
Life has moved on - we have the school system working for us now, both my kids are now coded as gifted and I've got a different job with a much better company.
Montreal is meant to be very cosmopolitan, I'd like to see it someday - Calgary has a lot of immigrants too (almost a milltion people had to come from somewhere first), but I wouldn't describe it as cosmopolitan.
(i still say tom-ay-to!) i try not to let it get to me too much. i got over being mistaken as an american after the first year!thats great to hear that things have gotten better tho!
montreal is definitely cosmopolitan, and it was a culture shock to move to non-london england
ps. sent you a pm
Aug 9th 2004, 1:37 pm
#70
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How long?
Will I get down and wonder if made a mistake (as this was the original question)?
Reasons and justifications for doing things are complex - a week later everything looks clearer and more positive - I've unstuck my career and I've got a plan again.
If you're having one of those days, think about what Robert F Kennedy said:
"Only those who dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly."
Aug 9th 2004, 5:05 pm
#71
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How long?
Originally Posted by Velouria
Was the discrimination your oldest child faced just the fact that he had a different accent? or was it more serious? (im assuming we're also talking elementary school - but correct me if im wrong)
It was lots more serious. We are talking about kindergarten here - so 4 and 5 year olds. Our son was bullied for 'not being Canadian'. This involved contact sufficient to bruise him - thats how we spotted it in the first place - together with verbal bullying too. Apparently he was told "I'm allowed to hit you because you were not born in Canada". The poor kid knew the second half of the comment was true so believed the first part too.
After it was reported the school dealt with it well. Fortunately the child lived out of area and therefore was not allowed to return for Grade 1.
The mother of the child was in complete denial over this and gave me a very rough time. She and her friends 'sent me to Coventry' for the rest of the term. It was an extremely difficult period for us. It also clarifies why her child had those opinions.
This whole incident resulted in a child who had previously enjoyed school turning into a child who was very reluctant to go each day.
Things are better at school now. They have been around long enough to have some friends. Even the teachers view them in a different way now that they are both coded as gifted - funny what being responsible for extra money being given to the school can do!
Aug 9th 2004, 5:20 pm
#72
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How long?
Originally Posted by Glaswegian
Mrs G here
It was lots more serious. We are talking about kindergarten here - so 4 and 5 year olds. Our son was bullied for 'not being Canadian'. This involved contact sufficient to bruise him - thats how we spotted it in the first place - together with verbal bullying too. Apparently he was told "I'm allowed to hit you because you were not born in Canada". The poor kid knew the second half of the comment was true so believed the first part too.
After it was reported the school dealt with it well. Fortunately the child lived out of area and therefore was not allowed to return for Grade 1.
The mother of the child was in complete denial over this and gave me a very rough time. She and her friends 'sent me to Coventry' for the rest of the term. It was an extremely difficult period for us. It also clarifies why her child had those opinions.
This whole incident resulted in a child who had previously enjoyed school turning into a child who was very reluctant to go each day.
Things are better at school now. They have been around long enough to have some friends. Even the teachers view them in a different way now that they are both coded as gifted - funny what being responsible for extra money being given to the school can do!
It was lots more serious. We are talking about kindergarten here - so 4 and 5 year olds. Our son was bullied for 'not being Canadian'. This involved contact sufficient to bruise him - thats how we spotted it in the first place - together with verbal bullying too. Apparently he was told "I'm allowed to hit you because you were not born in Canada". The poor kid knew the second half of the comment was true so believed the first part too.
After it was reported the school dealt with it well. Fortunately the child lived out of area and therefore was not allowed to return for Grade 1.
The mother of the child was in complete denial over this and gave me a very rough time. She and her friends 'sent me to Coventry' for the rest of the term. It was an extremely difficult period for us. It also clarifies why her child had those opinions.
This whole incident resulted in a child who had previously enjoyed school turning into a child who was very reluctant to go each day.
Things are better at school now. They have been around long enough to have some friends. Even the teachers view them in a different way now that they are both coded as gifted - funny what being responsible for extra money being given to the school can do!
jeez! what a horrible ordeal! im sorry to hear what you went through.. and also to hear that sort of xenophobia still exists in this day and age. my mother works in an elementary school as a secretary and ive heard horror stories of some kids, and even worse, the parents that back up that behaviour. its very sad that these views are being passed to children. but i am glad that the school dealt with it well and that things are better at school now.
Aug 10th 2004, 10:37 pm
#73
Forum Regular
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 30
Re: How long?
Originally Posted by mkamel
If I'm English and living in England, I would not immigrate at all to Canada or any where else. England is great and still the empire that the sun never sets down on.
What part of England do you live in then? My family and I were born and bred in the South East of England for the last 42 years and I can seriously say that it has deteriorated beyond reason as far as I am concerned, so much so that we have emigrated to Vancouver B.C. in order to get a better life for our children at least. You obviously haven't visited Canada or perhaps looked at the survey produced on Tuesday stating that out of the top six cities to live and work in the world, five of them were in Canada. Where was London etc. not even in the top 20. I wasn't aware there was any Empire left....
Aug 10th 2004, 11:02 pm
#74
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,015
Re: How long?
Originally Posted by dingbat
Canada is SO far behind in MOST things.....if you had perhaps lived in the UK in the last fifteen years the disparity between the two would be really evident. When you moved in 1968, England still offered the quaint "Heartbeat" type of life or the London sixties life if you were into all that. After the labour dispute years of the seventies things changed drastically. The UK became far more cosmopolitan, travel was cheap and the population mobile. During and after the reign of Herr Thatcher, the UK became one of the world leaders with social policy innovation and a market driven economy. Canada is still in the dark ages where the former is concerned and leaves a lot to be desired with its protectionist policies and bureaucratic overload where the latter is concerned. The UK caught up and left Canada behind a long long time ago. Just my opinion.
I totally agree with this. We left England in 1968. We went back a couple of times in the first five years and then not for another 20 odd years. By that time, in my opinion, England had outstripped Canada and it was like things had been reversed. When we left England - Canada was ahead in lots of things but now I don't think that is true. Canada has stayed the same - England has changed for the better. Well - with regard to the things that drew me to Canada in the first place.
Aug 10th 2004, 11:18 pm
#75
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Nov 2002
Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,062
Re: How long?
Originally Posted by lizwil98
I totally agree with this. We left England in 1968. We went back a couple of times in the first five years and then not for another 20 odd years. By that time, in my opinion, England had outstripped Canada and it was like things had been reversed. When we left England - Canada was ahead in lots of things but now I don't think that is true. Canada has stayed the same - England has changed for the better. Well - with regard to the things that drew me to Canada in the first place.
Maybe you've hit the nail on the head. From my last visit in 99 and from what I read in the expat newspapers I would say that England has outstripped Canada in materialism but not necessarily in quality of life. Unless they have managed to create more space and reduce the crowding, eliminate the rain and grey skies in the north etc.
So before moving to Canada determine what turns your crank. Materialism or Quality of Life.