Strange logic

Not the Guardian as such this time, but an article within by Kimberly McIntosh of The Runnymede Trust.

It's about integration of minorities and ability to speak English.

She complains the number of people who can't speak it is over estimated and then gives the "real figure" which, I suspect, may be under stated as she's met "countless people who claim to be “rubbish” at English but are basically fluent."

In my experience there are also those who say they are good enough but very clearly aren't. So it's likely somewhere in between.

But then comes a strange point.

Quote:

Communities secretary Sajid Javid made it clear which side he felt had work to do...if he’s serious about bringing “divided communities together”, then why is he so focused on 0.3% of the population?

Well, what would be the point in concentrating on the 99.7% who already communicate in English?

That's a really odd thing to say. A bit like saying 20% of people are no good at Maths so we're going to send the other 70% (joke) 80% for classes.

There was, of course a very good point as well. "And if the government is serious about increasing access to English language lessons, why did it slash funding by £132m between 2010 and 2015?"

After she appeared on BBC someone responded

Quote:

“kimberly ‘hood bitch’ mcintosh to go back to zoo. her narcist monkey face makes me to puke. ugly n*****”

Maybe we should scrap the internet and start again.