What is so special about a rich MP?

Margaret Thatcher - daughter of a grocer. Was a research chemist and went on to become the UK's first woman PM (Conservative)

John Major - son of an entertainer/garden ornament manufacturer (failed) - became PM (Conservative)

Hardly born into monied backgrounds. There are probably plenty more, but CBA looking just to score points.

Do you think they have above average IQs?
And other attributes?

Eerel, I had forgotten Javid, he is tipped as a future leader of the Tory party

What attributes are you thinking of obieone ?

Need to get back to basics obi

We were talking about whether it is a prerequisite to be wealthy in order to become an MP.

I then said that ordinary people -and by that I mean - none wealthy people are quite as capable if not more so given that they have achieved where they have got by merit.

You then said ordinary people had its IQs of 100, and the kids in my family arnt ordinary.

But under my definition they can have IQs covering the whole spectrum. But still be ordinary.

They can also have IQs covering the whole spectrum and be wealthy. In my argument they have found it easier to achieve because they get so much help.

John Major in his early 20s was working on a bank counter, Barclays I think. His subsequent journey to PM happened without higher education as far as I recall.

Annie, I listed other attributes at 15.03

whitewave, I definitely agree that wealth makes it easier to achieve, a whole lot easier. Good point.

I didnt quite understand what you meant by what is so special about a rich MP. Not sure I do yet either.

I think what you mean by ordinary is not wealthy.
I think what I mean by ordinary is partly down to intelligence. But more what I said at 17.16

I have had a brief look at google[havent finished looking yet] and of the current group of MPs, 3/4 are graduates. I dont call them ordinary

Well we are operating on two different definitions. But as long as we can agree that being wealthy doesn't make you a better mp than alls ok?

I think it's very ordinary, or at least usual, to be a graduate these days. It wasn't so when I was young, but many Gransnet members have degrees - some gained in later life, admittedly.

A degree isn't necessary to be an MP.
If you take an IQ of 100 as being ordinary, Obieone, should we test anyone who wants to be an MP? What sort of IQ should they have minimum?
Katie Hopkins said that anyone with an IQ of 80 or less needs to be taught to do up velcro, so obviously no MPs will be that low.

Obie, in 2010 it said that 90% of MPs had degrees compared to 34% in the general public.
Not sure if that included honorary degrees or not.

What a charmer Hopkins is.

Nearly 20% of the population have a degree, so far from ordinary.

No I dont think they should be tested durhamjen. But there again, I dont see how they can approve laws and read research papers and whatever other documents they have to get to grips with, let alone understand and have opinions on policies if their IQ is low or even 100.

whitewave, I am still thinking about your last post

They get the civil servants to do a lot of the work or their paid aids

Yes she is a charmer! But she makes you think.

We must have looked up different figures dj, but I think that the point is the same. Your figures make it better than mine do.

ana blimey a red letter day we agree!

I suppose they do whitewave, but some final decisions come down to them. And I would hope they understand what is given to them.

Given some of the daft decisions I am not convinced they always do!

The article is simply trying to diss the Labour mayoral candidates surely?

Vote for bonkers buffoon Boris even though he is rich he is really a nice chap! (Not in my books) Don't vote for Khan he is using his ordinary background to fool you! (I don't think so!)

I agree that having / not having wealth , of itself, does not make you a better or worse person. It is surely one's attitude to wealth and what you do with it that matters! If you take an 'I'm all right Jack' attitude and build up wealth by not giving a second thought to who you might be squashing on the way then I don't like that no matter if you started with nothing /inherited millions!

If however you build your wealth and take an ethical stand on wages/ sourcing of goods etc. etc and are generally aware that others lives may be a bit tougher than yours for many reasons and bear that in mind when doing business etc then I like that no matter if you started with nothing /inherited millions!

Sorry.. to add to my commentsabove..think of th Bournville's etc who used their wealth..albeit quite avuncular, but to try to benefit their labour force.

Paternalistic though even if you admire their intention.

Yes, agreed, but better than not caring at all and abusing your workforce.

Uncle/ father it is all the same attitude

I'd rather have paternalistic Bournvilles and Rowntrees than the Rothschilds and Goldsmiths.

If it hadn't been for the Rowntrees there would not have been the beginnings of the welfare state.

I'm trying hard to think of anyone who inherited millions and used it ethically. Most of the ones I can think of are those who started from a working class background.

Sorry, Cadburys not Bournvilles.

Bournville was considered a good place to work until the takeover by US owners. The new CEO didn't even bother to visit.