Private schools, times a changing?

[Tom8]

borcy said:

TUS373 said:

Good point. There's a big number of kids in private education who's parents are in the armed forces. The parents are based all over the world and kids board. Will the VAT apply to the whole school bill or just the education element? Either way, big bills coming for those in the forces or the forces themselves if they sub it.

Not a particularly big bill, there's not many forces kids in boarding. Vat it'll be maybe £15m more on the MoDs bill.

Really? I know several myself, all with two kids or more all boarding and that is just me. Funny, when posted overseas, you need boarding for the kids.

[z4RRSchris]

at the school i went to was prob 15-20 in each year with forces parents. so 25% of the kids.

[soxboy]

The majority of UK kids at my wife’s school are forces.

Overall pupil split 50:50 UK and foreign (Chinese/ Thai/ Philippines and Russian but of course not actually Russian).

[TUS373]

Interesting. So Force's kids have to board, and most boarding schools are private. Take a family where parents are deployed overseas. May be a family with 2 or 3 kids. Parents are unlikely to get a pay rise to cover the additional cost from application of VAT. So....sounds like the Forces will have to pick up the tab. That requires extra funding of the military that is immediately creamed off as tax. Brilliant plan huh?

[TUS373]

Let's not forget though.....education is a luxury no?

[TownIdiot]

TUS373 said:

Interesting. So Force's kids have to board, and most boarding schools are private. Take a family where parents are deployed overseas. May be a family with 2 or 3 kids. Parents are unlikely to get a pay rise to cover the additional cost from application of VAT. So....sounds like the Forces will have to pick up the tab. That requires extra funding of the military that is immediately creamed off as tax. Brilliant plan huh?

Force's kids don't "have" to board. It's a choice.

And if the government are paying the fees then it doesn't really make any difference.

[TUS373]

But a lot do board. I don't really know what the alternative is.

There's so much sentiment of stick it to the rich, private education is a luxury. I would say not so...Force's kids being part of that evidence.

If the government are paying for it....well....they will be claiming an increase on spending on defence. A portion of that though is just getting circulated back.

[borcy]

Tom8 said:

borcy said:

TUS373 said:

Good point. There's a big number of kids in private education who's parents are in the armed forces. The parents are based all over the world and kids board. Will the VAT apply to the whole school bill or just the education element? Either way, big bills coming for those in the forces or the forces themselves if they sub it.

Not a particularly big bill, there's not many forces kids in boarding. Vat it'll be maybe £15m more on the MoDs bill.

Really? I know several myself, all with two kids or more all boarding and that is just me. Funny, when posted overseas, you need boarding for the kids.

No not that many. It's been falling for years. I think this year it's under 4000, inc day and boarders. Used to a lot more not that many years ago. It'll probably keep falling as well for various reasons. Perhaps private schooling used to rely on forces kids in the past, now it's probably less than 1%.

You do need it sometimes but not always when posted overseas. I've known plenty take their kids when posted overseas

[TownIdiot]

TUS373 said:

But a lot do board. I don't really know what the alternative is.

There's so much sentiment of stick it to the rich, private education is a luxury. I would say not so...Force's kids being part of that evidence.

If the government are paying for it....well....they will be claiming an increase on spending on defence. A portion of that though is just getting circulated back.

Alternative is take the kids with you or the non posted parent looks after them.
It's not really rocket science.

[ClaphamGT3]

TownIdiot said:

Alternative is take the kids with you or the non posted parent looks after them.
It's not really rocket science.

Depending on postings, you have to move your kids to different schools three or four times including, potentially, during important exam years whereas settling them in a boarding school gives them stability.

Most married couples like living together - it's kind of the point of marriage.

It's not really rocket science

[TownIdiot]

ClaphamGT3 said:

Depending on postings, you have to move your kids to different schools three or four times including, potentially, during important exam years whereas settling them in a boarding school gives them stability.

Most married couples like living together - it's kind of the point of marriage.

It's not really rocket science

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.

[GT03ROB]

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.

[borcy]

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.

[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.