UK government ministers

A report presented in the observer stated that few of the world’s richest people have invested in about $12 trillion in offshore ventures which roughly adds up to ten times of Britain’s GDP. But the fact remains that the people who endorse labor policies are not usually foreign oligarchs. Studies have shown the ratio of high income/high net worth for British people are categorized under three respects. The most prominent of these are the top hundred ranking CEO’s of FTSE earn approximately ? 1 million annually including all financial, retail and property service providers.

The last would include a relatively invisible group whose income and importance provide a base for the financial sector which include larger amounts of cash on huge transactions or providing ownership in equity and hedge funds. Although there is a contrary view, which states that we all should be elitist in broadly two aspects. Words which are commonly used like being elite or elitist and the slag version being snobbish have been used in various contexts also in the councils of professors and heads of computing and discussions of the UK computing and research committee. It is manly assumed that being a snob is considered to be bad.

But in context to the UK government I’d wish to argue, that elitist that is precious needs to be diligently promoted. This should happen because it provides a concern for the quality of research teaching and also learning. Concerns the government from increasing the proportion to achieve high quality and effective policies and laws to benefit the entire country, and lastly the concern of efficient allocation of resources so that all macro and micro economic goals may be achieved, failure of many politicians in the government which includes all ministers, to basically understand which is usually based on scoffed thinking about elitism.

When this results in a trickle down effect, it usually infects all academics and also deteriorates quality of the government and their goals, this also includes the quality of management and funding where calling names like elitist should not be a replacement argument and analysis. For illustration purposes let us compare the distorting semantics of the word liberal in America.

As stated in many reports the current UK Secretary has been influenced by this tendency to uses the term liberal with an abusive connotation, when particularly responding to any sort of criticism to his plans of the issuance of identity cards instead of tackling more obvious issues. This could basically be a write off comment or a highly dangerous sign of subservience if both e the American and British governments. As far as the argument of elitism is concerned, distorted thinking can surface out of the inability to distinguish between the usages of the word elite as an adjective, which basically means elite.

The two possibilities are, one could employ at a best task or activity which may include policy making, foreign affairs, district and federal governments etc. the other alternative could be is concentration on individuals belonging to a particular group like athletes, celebrities and aristocracy. When used as noun elite is implied, firstly talking about the funding of the ministers but the derived words like elitism and elitist are often paired up the second issue discussed earlier.

What has happened in recent times is that politicians and many others have confused the caring of the elite in the first case with somewhat being elitist is the second case. Many examples in the UK government ministers including the Home Secretary was managing the education department, who tried to justify the high grades obtained by A-level students due to their hard work, who tends to fall to name calling instead of providing valid arguments against all those who dare to present evidence of the visible lowered standards because the criteria used to provide grades has fallen drastically.