Private schools, times a changing?

[cheesejunkie]

Zio Di Roma said:

Then, as I mooted earlier, you were as a child less principled than you are as a man. Otherwise you would have insisted upon attending the local comp, rather than the Grammar.

There is no difference between you having benefited from a grammar education and a child benefiting from a private one.

really?

As a child I should have insisted.

And I'm the one considered an idiot on this thread?

I don't even point out the spelling and grammar mistakes some make as I'm sure I've made some myself. We agrees with lots.

I'll repeat. Attack all you want and it'll be water off a duck's back. Defend and I'll listen. There's not much defence on the go other than mwah I don't want to pay.

[M1AGM]

You’re just arguing for the sake of it.

You add nothing. Save the keyboard some dignity and go graciously.

[cheesejunkie]

M1AGM said:

You’re just arguing for the sake of it.

You add nothing. Save the keyboard some dignity and go graciously.

I will but that's still not a defence.

Ok, I won't, but I'll pretend to walk away.

[u-boat]

cheesejunkie said:

I'll post on any thread I feel like posting on.

I'm not unaffected by people wanting their children to have tax advantages.

It's not a hobby, if my opinion is an annoyance I'll not worry.

I'm not bitter, those getting very annoyed by my opinions might be.

Now do you have a defence of your position rather than an attack of mine? I can tell the difference.

You’ve posted almost 80 times about this topic, a topic you’re apparently not overly concerned about and don’t post on. It’s definitely a bit weird.

My position is I tried to give my children the best education and opportunities I could. What do I need to defend about that? I couldn’t care less if you think that’s wrong or whatever.

Nobody’s annoyed by you. If you’re just trolling though, you’re not very good at it tbh. Most decent trolling is actually funny, your trolling is just a bit dull, repetitive and unimaginative.

[turbobloke]

cheesejunkie said:

turbobloke said:

Is that due to independent schools attracting the best teachers? Some will be tempted but many remain doing a great job in state schools.

Otherwise, how does saving the state from paying to educate even more children, while still making tax contributions towards that cost, actually harm the state system?

I pay lots of taxes that I don't get a return on. I don't agree with your starting premise that it should be a zero sum game.

It's not my starting premise in that I didn't claim it was a zero sum game.

Everyone who pays tax contributes to all government spending, which includes education.
Parents paying for independent education who have taxables of any kind also contribute to the education budget.
However the children of those parents don't "consume" any of the education portion of tax resources paid in via parental taxes, which means other children in state education get some benefit.
As per my original post, this does no harm.

If independent schools nabbed all the good teachers, that would be something that harmed the state sector, but they don't.

[cheesejunkie]

u-boat said:

You’ve posted almost 80 times about this topic, a topic you’re apparently not overly concerned about and don’t post on. It’s definitely a bit weird.

My position is I tried to give my children the best education and opportunities I could. What do I need to defend about that? I couldn’t care less if you think that’s wrong or whatever.

Nobody’s annoyed by you. If you’re just trolling though, you’re not very good at it tbh. Most decent trolling is actually funny, your trolling is just a bit dull, repetitive and unimaginative.

I'm not trolling. Disagreeing is not trolling.

I'm not trying to be funny, I'm not your fking clown.

Your position is to give your children the best opportunity that's fine by me. I don't have a problem with that bit. I have a problem with those suggesting theirs should have a better start than others due to wealth. I have an extra big problem with those who complain about it being taxed. I find it amusing in some ways but all the suggestions that I shouldn't comment just encourage me to do so because I've a right to an opinion. There are a lot of people on this thread who'd prefer it to be a reach around rather than have any dissent and like yourself have yet to make a defence rather than just chuck insults.

Edited by cheesejunkie on Thursday 4th April 20:04

[u-boat]

cheesejunkie said:

I'm not trolling. Disagreeing is not trolling.

I'm not trying to be funny, I'm not your fking clown.

Your position is to give your children the best opportunity that's fine by me. I don't have a problem with that bit. I have a problem with those suggesting theirs should have a better start than others due to wealth. I have an extra big problem with those who complain about it being taxed. I find it amusing in some ways but all the suggestions that I shouldn't comment just encourage me to do so because I've a right to an opinion. There are a lot of people on this thread who'd prefer it to be a reach around rather than have any dissent and like yourself have yet to make a defence rather than just chuck insults.

Edited by cheesejunkie on Thursday 4th April 20:04

It’s not dissent you’re offering it’s just spite and Schadenfreude.

You’re obviously an intelligent person but you must realise that some people will be very concerned and adversely impacted by these changes and you’re simply gloating whilst pretending to be empathetic.

Why do I need to make any defence? My motivation is to give my kids the best opportunities in life I can. It’s entirely up to you or others what they do or how they want to help their children.

[cheesejunkie]

u-boat said:

It’s not dissent you’re offering it’s just spite and Schadenfreude.

You’re obviously an intelligent person but you must realise that some people will be very concerned and adversely impacted by these changes and you’re simply gloating whilst pretending to be empathetic.

Why do I need to make any defence? My motivation is to give my kids the best opportunities in life I can. It’s entirely up to you or others what they do or how they want to help their children.

Yes I realise that. Some will be adversely affected. I'm not gloating. I'm not a heartless ste. But my heart doesn't bleed for others who've been quite heartless themselves and now find themselves in trouble.

I've nothing against you u-boat unless you are a German submarine but you need to understand I've the right to disagree.

Look after your children, I've no problem, neglect others, now we're going to have an argument.

[Ken_Code]

u-boat said:

It’s not dissent you’re offering it’s just spite and Schadenfreude.

You’re obviously an intelligent person but you must realise that some people will be very concerned and adversely impacted by these changes and you’re simply gloating whilst pretending to be empathetic.

Why do I need to make any defence? My motivation is to give my kids the best opportunities in life I can. It’s entirely up to you or others what they do or how they want to help their children.

I don’t see why any sympathy should be accorded to children who may return to the same standard of education as experienced by around 90% of other children.

The “hardship” is like no longer being able to afford lobster.

[Zio Di Roma]

Ken_Code said:

u-boat said:

It’s not dissent you’re offering it’s just spite and Schadenfreude.

You’re obviously an intelligent person but you must realise that some people will be very concerned and adversely impacted by these changes and you’re simply gloating whilst pretending to be empathetic.

Why do I need to make any defence? My motivation is to give my kids the best opportunities in life I can. It’s entirely up to you or others what they do or how they want to help their children.

I don’t see why any sympathy should be accorded to children who may return to the same standard of education as experienced by around 90% of other children.

The “hardship” is like no longer being able to afford lobster.

Because a lot of children are paid for privately due to the fact the state sector has failed them, not just because the parents want better for them. I feel for those children if the parents are priced out by VAT.

Your comment about lobster is puerile.

[Ken_Code]

Zio Di Roma said:

Because a lot of children are paid for privately due to the fact the state sector has failed them, not just because the parents want better for them. I feel for those children if the parents are priced out by VAT.

Your comment about lobster is puerile.

How so? Why should anyone who’s back in the general population elicit sympathy?

I do understand that if your children are a bit thick then you want to pay to stop them suffering too much, but you can’t expect sympathy when you can no longer afford it and their future becomes a function of their ability.

[Mr Penguin]

Ken_Code said:

How so? Why should anyone who’s back in the general population elicit sympathy?

I do understand that if your children are a bit thick then you want to pay to stop them suffering too much, but you can’t expect sympathy when you can no longer afford it and their future becomes a function of their ability.

Some people move their children to private schools because they were bullied in state school, so having to send them back can become a safety issue.

[Ken_Code]

Mr Penguin said:

Some people move their children to private schools because they were bullied in state school, so having to send them back can become a safety issue.

I don’t know that private schools are any better. When researching where to send our boys it seemed that it was relatively similar.

Again, though, suggesting that those whose parents gave money should be better protected from bullying isn’t clearly a moral positive.

[Mr Penguin]

Ken_Code said:

I don’t know that private schools are any better. When researching where to send our boys it seemed that it was relatively similar.

Again, though, suggesting that those whose parents gave money should be better protected from bullying isn’t clearly a moral positive.

Do you not have sympathy for children who are being bullied?

[Zio Di Roma]

Mr Penguin said:

Ken_Code said:

I don’t know that private schools are any better. When researching where to send our boys it seemed that it was relatively similar.

Again, though, suggesting that those whose parents gave money should be better protected from bullying isn’t clearly a moral positive.

Do you not have sympathy for children who are being bullied?

It's not just bullying. State schools can be crap when it comes to SENs.

[cheesejunkie]

turbobloke said:

It's not my starting premise in that I didn't claim it was a zero sum game.

Everyone who pays tax contributes to all government spending, which includes education.
Parents paying for independent education who have taxables of any kind also contribute to the education budget.
However the children of those parents don't "consume" any of the education portion of tax resources paid in via parental taxes, which means other children in state education get some benefit.
As per my original post, this does no harm.

If independent schools nabbed all the good teachers, that would be something that harmed the state sector, but they don't.

Turbo, I don't always disagree with you but here goes ...

We all pay tax only some complain about it.

Parent's paying for independent education is fine as long as they don't expect special privileges for doing so. They're not saviours of the race.

Everyone's a consumer whether I like to be or not. I don't agree with a world with where everyone is accountable to their consumption but if I did I reckon we could have a good argument on how it's weighted.

[Ken_Code]

Mr Penguin said:

Do you not have sympathy for children who are being bullied?

I have massive sympathy for them, bullying is appalling.

[Cheib]

Raddors said:

Hedgedhog said:

This is in line with the advice I've been given. I certainly don't see any downside in testing it.

Absolutely agree. Many schools are taking individual tax advice but no advisor is going to nail their colour to the mast and give a guarantee one way or the other at this stage. So parents should not be banking on it as a surefire way to avoid VAT for the duration of their child's education.

You can get tax advice and you can get an “opinion” from HMRC but that won’t stop HMRC changing their mind in retrospect if they want to. Been there done that.

You’ll get a letter three years down the line saying “We’re issuing you with an APN because we believe you owe us the VAT on those advance school fees you paid three years ago”

You then have the choice to argue the toss or pay up.

They literally make the rules up as they go along. They’ll probably say the advance payment was made with the express intention of avoiding tax so existing tax legislation doesn’t apply.

If it was a handful of people paying in advance it probably wouldn’t get flagged but once you have a few thousand people pre paying it is then meaningful for HMRC to set up a team to reclaim it.

They have seven years to challenge your tax return, issuing an APN then puts that tax return in limbo and effectively buys them time.

They’re utter s

[Cheib]

Mr Penguin said:

Ken_Code said:

I don’t know that private schools are any better. When researching where to send our boys it seemed that it was relatively similar.

Again, though, suggesting that those whose parents gave money should be better protected from bullying isn’t clearly a moral positive.

Do you not have sympathy for children who are being bullied?

Private schools in my experience tend to be more proactive in dealing with bullying or bad behaviour…in my son’s first year at his senior private school three boys were expelled. My understanding in each case it wasn’t one specific incident but a succession of issues. I get the impression it is not easy to get expelled but when it comes to it they will make the decision/they have the ability to make the decision.

[Mr Penguin]

I went to a state school in year 7 and 8 and while lots of things happened, the worst was someone trying to set fire to another boy's head - he came back the next day with no punishment besides a ticking off. This was supposedly a very good comp in a middle class area.

Private school from year 9 onwards was completely different - break the rules sufficiently and you are gone. On several occasions it was made abundantly clear to us through words and actions that certain behaviour would not be tolerated and even that this applied to actions at other schools before joining ours. Needless to say that this approach meant that the teachers spent more time actually teaching.