Private schools, times a changing?

[DonkeyApple]

borcy said:

GT03ROB said:

TownIdiot said:

It seems pretty unlikely that any vat will impact those in the armed forces, as most of it will be paid for by the government.

So between this & additional costs for state education, this really isn't raising much is it.

Best Labour just call this for what it is. Ideological & envy politics.

No one really knows. Like all future policies for each report saying it's the best thing since sliced bread you can find another report saying it'll be a disaster.

The key is that it obviously won't raise the amount they've said. They obviously won't be hiring any extra teachers. And if they were to reveal what they really plan to spend all the money on the average punter this is designed to make happy would lose their st and that's before they work out where any new teachers are going to be brought in from.

[borcy]

I'm sure Labour would claim the exact opposite and back it up with reports of their own

[NDA]

DonkeyApple said:

The key is that it obviously won't raise the amount they've said. They obviously won't be hiring any extra teachers. And if they were to reveal what they really plan to spend all the money on the average punter this is designed to make happy would lose their st and that's before they work out where any new teachers are going to be brought in from.

I imagine that those with children in private education are in the top 10% of income earners - a group that already pays over 50% of all tax collected. It always makes me laugh when I hear socialists banging on about 'those with the broadest shoulders should pay more'. Unfortunately this important 10% of taxpayers is not a big enough group to prevent more taxation. If students weren't quite so militant, universities would have VAT applied too.

Private education is not about 'privilege' , it's about choice. Economic freedom is not something that socialism can support.

[beagrizzly]

Interesting leaked WhatsApp messages on the twitter this morning, apparently rallying the 'troops' to register all their privately educated children for September entry at state schools, whether or not they intend to move, to scare the NUT and consequently the Labour party / new government into thinking again.

Can't help but feel that this will only further motivate the spiteful and envious; possible own goal. (If true. Source is the Mirror, apparently)

[Ascayman]

borcy said:

GT03ROB said:

TownIdiot said:

It seems pretty unlikely that any vat will impact those in the armed forces, as most of it will be paid for by the government.

So between this & additional costs for state education, this really isn't raising much is it.

Best Labour just call this for what it is. Ideological & envy politics.

No one really knows. Like all future policies for each report saying it's the best thing since sliced bread you can find another report saying it'll be a disaster.

There’s been plenty of reports saying this will be a disaster (even one from the guardian) can’t recall any saying that it’s the best thing since sliced bread. Any links?

[DonkeyApple]

NDA said:

DonkeyApple said:

The key is that it obviously won't raise the amount they've said. They obviously won't be hiring any extra teachers. And if they were to reveal what they really plan to spend all the money on the average punter this is designed to make happy would lose their st and that's before they work out where any new teachers are going to be brought in from.

I imagine that those with children in private education are in the top 10% of income earners - a group that already pays over 50% of all tax collected. It always makes me laugh when I hear socialists banging on about 'those with the broadest shoulders should pay more'. Unfortunately this important 10% of taxpayers is not a big enough group to prevent more taxation. If students weren't quite so militant, universities would have VAT applied too.

Private education is not about 'privilege' , it's about choice. Economic freedom is not something that socialism can support.

I honestly don't think this has anything to do with some so highbrow as Socialism. This is simply the same mechanism as the neighbour next door getting a colour tv, satellite dish or a new Audi and the decision to absolutely hate them for ever more and blame them for everything.

It's just the Bitter Brit mindset. Blame and despise those with a little more for one having a little less and then roll in the dirt at the feet of someone who owns a bit of land or has been on TV desperately begging them to acknowledge their existence. Hate filled, obsequious cannon fodder.

And they're thick to boot as anyone can work out the approximate amount to be raised and the approximate share that is to go back into education.

If every penny raised we're going back into education and they also proposed to levy means tested fees on state that would also be ploughed in then I'd actually buy into that. The U.K. desperately needs to raise the standard of its state education, needs to fire a vast number of negligent and incompetent adult educators and buy in more real teachers. And it needs to stop enabling the bad parents but instead showing their victim children that their parents are full time losers and giving them a clear path to breaking free of a potential lifetime prison sentence of those losers.

[u-boat]

It still hasn’t been clarified whether these changes cover specialist schools like performing arts schools.

These aren’t full of rich kids either and are based entirely on ability and also offer plenty of scholarships but I’m sure the chippy types will have it in for those kids and their parents also.

[TUS373]

DonkeyApple said:

obsequious cannon fodder.

Quote of the day! I want to use that. Made me laugh.

[Louis Balfour]

u-boat said:

It still hasn’t been clarified whether these changes cover specialist schools like performing arts schools.

These aren’t full of rich kids either and are based entirely on ability and also offer plenty of scholarships but I’m sure the chippy types will have it in for those kids and their parents also.

Bound to be exempt. I can imagine there being an exemption for “special” schools where special = not somewhere where “rich Tory bds” send their children.

[Tom8]

Louis Balfour said:

u-boat said:

It still hasn’t been clarified whether these changes cover specialist schools like performing arts schools.

These aren’t full of rich kids either and are based entirely on ability and also offer plenty of scholarships but I’m sure the chippy types will have it in for those kids and their parents also.

Bound to be exempt. I can imagine there being an exemption for “special” schools where special = not somewhere where “rich Tory bds” send their children.

And look what the state is providing...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ceqq46x068xo

Labour and people here can frame it any way they like but it is just pure spite and nothing more. Perhaps they should tax the PCP white audis and range rovers at state schools as that is the choice of those parents?

[macron]

Louis Balfour said:

u-boat said:

It still hasn’t been clarified whether these changes cover specialist schools like performing arts schools.

These aren’t full of rich kids either and are based entirely on ability and also offer plenty of scholarships but I’m sure the chippy types will have it in for those kids and their parents also.

Bound to be exempt. I can imagine there being an exemption for “special” schools where special = not somewhere where “rich Tory bds” send their children.

Erm, why? One of mine went to a ballet school and as a charity (obvs) and private school (obvs) and member of the mighty ISC (obvs) they are 100% certain they'll get whacked.

[Vixpy1]

macron said:

Louis Balfour said:

u-boat said:

It still hasn’t been clarified whether these changes cover specialist schools like performing arts schools.

These aren’t full of rich kids either and are based entirely on ability and also offer plenty of scholarships but I’m sure the chippy types will have it in for those kids and their parents also.

Bound to be exempt. I can imagine there being an exemption for “special” schools where special = not somewhere where “rich Tory bds” send their children.

Erm, why? One of mine went to a ballet school and as a charity (obvs) and private school (obvs) and member of the mighty ISC (obvs) they are 100% certain they'll get whacked.

Labour have confirmed that unless your child is on a SEN goverment plan, you will be wacked with VAT

[Louis Balfour]

macron said:

Louis Balfour said:

u-boat said:

It still hasn’t been clarified whether these changes cover specialist schools like performing arts schools.

These aren’t full of rich kids either and are based entirely on ability and also offer plenty of scholarships but I’m sure the chippy types will have it in for those kids and their parents also.

Bound to be exempt. I can imagine there being an exemption for “special” schools where special = not somewhere where “rich Tory bds” send their children.

Erm, why? One of mine went to a ballet school and as a charity (obvs) and private school (obvs) and member of the mighty ISC (obvs) they are 100% certain they'll get whacked.

Because arts.

I may be wrong, obvs.

[macron]

Louis Balfour said:

Because arts.

I may be wrong, obvs.

What matters is a weird promise to some weird people to do a weird thing to upset a minority.

[Swervin_Mervin]

Do we think faith schools will be exempted? Could be a tranche of suddenly very religious independent schools springing up if so

[Tom8]

Swervin_Mervin said:

Do we think faith schools will be exempted? Could be a tranche of suddenly very religious independent schools springing up if so

They'll have to tax all of them just to get close to making any of the claimed money they seem to think it will generate.

[borcy]

Ascayman said:

borcy said:

GT03ROB said:

TownIdiot said:

It seems pretty unlikely that any vat will impact those in the armed forces, as most of it will be paid for by the government.

So between this & additional costs for state education, this really isn't raising much is it.

Best Labour just call this for what it is. Ideological & envy politics.

No one really knows. Like all future policies for each report saying it's the best thing since sliced bread you can find another report saying it'll be a disaster.

There’s been plenty of reports saying this will be a disaster (even one from the guardian) can’t recall any saying that it’s the best thing since sliced bread. Any links?

I'm sure labour has some on their site.

[DonkeyApple]

NDA said:

I imagine that those with children in private education are in the top 10% of income earners - a group that already pays over 50% of all tax collected. It always makes me laugh when I hear socialists banging on about 'those with the broadest shoulders should pay more'. Unfortunately this important 10% of taxpayers is not a big enough group to prevent more taxation. If students weren't quite so militant, universities would have VAT applied too.

Private education is not about 'privilege' , it's about choice. Economic freedom is not something that socialism can support.

What's worth noting is that they aren't the top 10% but just a subset of it and not that large a one. By spending a large part of their income on educating members of the next generation they are potentially taking some quite low income earners (not all private school children are smart by any means and many parents plumb for paying as a result of birthing someone not particularly intelligent) and giving them the best chance to pay vast amounts of tax in their adult life.

Meanwhile the state system is where the majority of the children of that top 10% are educated and where the tax paying prospects of future adults are damaged very heavily by sub par parents and sub par teachers, yet some in society prefer not to address the ongoing problem of these sub par adults but go looking for others to blame.

The state school system requires a huge and ongoing injection of cash, more so than the NHS where the majority of customers have had an entire adult working life to have looked after themselves and chosen not to, with many opting to lug about several stone of lard for decades which others then have to pay for the heart, stroke and joint medication for. What the state system needs beyond this cash is the desire to be as good as the private alternative which would see fewer customers choosing private over state in the first instance. I really don't see why means tested fees shouldn't be applied to the state system.

[Tom8]

DonkeyApple said:

NDA said:

I imagine that those with children in private education are in the top 10% of income earners - a group that already pays over 50% of all tax collected. It always makes me laugh when I hear socialists banging on about 'those with the broadest shoulders should pay more'. Unfortunately this important 10% of taxpayers is not a big enough group to prevent more taxation. If students weren't quite so militant, universities would have VAT applied too.

Private education is not about 'privilege' , it's about choice. Economic freedom is not something that socialism can support.

What's worth noting is that they aren't the top 10% but just a subset of it and not that large a one. By spending a large part of their income on educating members of the next generation they are potentially taking some quite low income earners (not all private school children are smart by any means and many parents plumb for paying as a result of birthing someone not particularly intelligent) and giving them the best chance to pay vast amounts of tax in their adult life.

Meanwhile the state system is where the majority of the children of that top 10% are educated and where the tax paying prospects of future adults are damaged very heavily by sub par parents and sub par teachers, yet some in society prefer not to address the ongoing problem of these sub par adults but go looking for others to blame.

The state school system requires a huge and ongoing injection of cash, more so than the NHS where the majority of customers have had an entire adult working life to have looked after themselves and chosen not to, with many opting to lug about several stone of lard for decades which others then have to pay for the heart, stroke and joint medication for. What the state system needs beyond this cash is the desire to be as good as the private alternative which would see fewer customers choosing private over state in the first instance. I really don't see why means tested fees shouldn't be applied to the state system.

Er, you do know that private schools have entrance exams and children have to reach a standard to enter? I think they call it "selective".
But you are right, if the state system was any good, people wouldn't feel compelled to spend large sums of money to take their children out of it. Paying school fees is far from a pleasure.

[DonkeyApple]

Tom8 said:

Er, you do know that private schools have entrance exams and children have to reach a standard to enter? I think they call it "selective".
But you are right, if the state system was any good, people wouldn't feel compelled to spend large sums of money to take their children out of it. Paying school fees is far from a pleasure.

They do have entrance exams but whether they set their bar to accept only the intelligent is a business decision. Many do not and some specifically cater for the children who wouldn't get into the academic ones. These latter ones used to referred to as 'sporting schools'. And they often didn't field particularly excellent sporting sides at events either.

Schools will also make the commercial decision to let in children who have failed their commons entrance exam if that child is the offspring of an alumni, a family of name or if a smart enough sibling is already in attendance. And don't forget that with prep schools they're interviewing the parents not the child.

When I was sitting CE, many moons ago, the fall back school for us was Harrow who had a much lower pass mark and if things went terribly wrong then people ended up at Stowe or Shiplake. Our nearest school out here doesn't select at all on academia in reality but the number of ponies and amount of land or they'd have no clients.

Edited by DonkeyApple on Tuesday 18th June 11:18

Edited by DonkeyApple on Tuesday 18th June 11:19