So it's class war then...

[heppers75]

oyster said:

heppers75 said:

Or you could simply choose to have the children you can afford!

Completely agree with your sentiment in general, but are you seriously suggesting there are £40k earners out there sticking to just one child in order to pay for private school fees some ten or more years later?

heppers75 said:

I am saying that there are at least some people out there that are socially responsible enough to live within their means and that includes deciding on how many kids they have based on their aspirations for those kids. As opposed to assuming they have "the right" to have as many as they like and then expect a gold plated existence and that they should all be £100K+ a year people when they grow up simply because they chose to have them and the government should see to their "rights" being supported.

It is certainly not our only rationale and as it happens we could now comfortably afford to put another 2 or 3 through that system, when we decided to have our son that was not certain and one of the reasons we chose one (outside of various none related issues) was that we wanted to ensure we could give one child the best chance in life. We might have "wanted" more but we "chose" not to give in to want and instead focus on what we could responsibly do.

There are far far far too many that do not!

oyster said:

That's a separate argument.

My point is that you need to be pretty damn wealthy to be able to afford private schooling for an average of 2 kids. (and be honest, having 2 children is hardly mass breeding is it?)

I am not really sure you do, although it depends on your definition of "pretty dam wealthy".

If you assume that to put 2 kids through an average private school with £12k a year fee's call it £26k a year net with extras. A couple on a combined income of £100k a year could do it - I can think of a couple of parents at my sons school who are probably on that sort of combined income and they have two kids at the school.

[oyster]

heppers75 said:

oyster said:

heppers75 said:

Or you could simply choose to have the children you can afford!

Completely agree with your sentiment in general, but are you seriously suggesting there are £40k earners out there sticking to just one child in order to pay for private school fees some ten or more years later?

heppers75 said:

I am saying that there are at least some people out there that are socially responsible enough to live within their means and that includes deciding on how many kids they have based on their aspirations for those kids. As opposed to assuming they have "the right" to have as many as they like and then expect a gold plated existence and that they should all be £100K+ a year people when they grow up simply because they chose to have them and the government should see to their "rights" being supported.

It is certainly not our only rationale and as it happens we could now comfortably afford to put another 2 or 3 through that system, when we decided to have our son that was not certain and one of the reasons we chose one (outside of various none related issues) was that we wanted to ensure we could give one child the best chance in life. We might have "wanted" more but we "chose" not to give in to want and instead focus on what we could responsibly do.

There are far far far too many that do not!

oyster said:

That's a separate argument.

My point is that you need to be pretty damn wealthy to be able to afford private schooling for an average of 2 kids. (and be honest, having 2 children is hardly mass breeding is it?)

I am not really sure you do, although it depends on your definition of "pretty dam wealthy".

If you assume that to put 2 kids through an average private school with £12k a year fee's call it £26k a year net with extras. A couple on a combined income of £100k a year could do it - I can think of a couple of parents at my sons school who are probably on that sort of combined income and they have two kids at the school.

Combined income of £100k (hope it's 2 earners at £50k each rather than one at £100k) is in the top 2% for the UK. Top 2%. And you don't think that's wealthy?

[NomduJour]

Depends where you live.

[FredClogs]

NomduJour said:

Depends where you live.

He said top 2% for the UK, so I presume he means if you live in the UK.

[NomduJour]

Even the wilfully stupid can see that a family income of £100k in Central London is different from a family income of £100k in, say, Middlesbrough.

[Randomthoughts]

NomduJour said:

Even the wilfully stupid can see that a family income of £100k in Central London is different from a family income of £100k in, say, Middlesbrough.

I think you place too much faith in the wilfully stupid.

[FredClogs]

NomduJour said:

Even the wilfully stupid can see that a family income of £100k in Central London is different from a family income of £100k in, say, Middlesbrough.

No, the income is the same, the choice of housing is different - and that's all.

[Randomthoughts]

FredClogs said:

No, the income is the same, the choice of housing is different - and that's all.

Um.

You get nearly double bubble in London doing some of the work that I do. Ditto many other things. Downside is the cost of living is more than that.

Of course £1 is £1 is £1, but then I suspect you know full well what the poster means.

[heppers75]

oyster said:

Combined income of £100k (hope it's 2 earners at £50k each rather than one at £100k) is in the top 2% for the UK. Top 2%. And you don't think that's wealthy?

I think someone on say £60k and another on circa £40k is not uncommon in what I would call professional families. I would also contend that they do not see themselves as "pretty dam wealthy" I would say they are doing well, to my mind "pretty dam wealthy" would not be someone on £60k a year, but it is all about perspective I guess.

[heppers75]

NomduJour said:

Even the wilfully stupid can see that a family income of £100k in Central London is different from a family income of £100k in, say, Middlesbrough.

As I have said earlier then that is a choice you make. You can choose to live elsewhere if that is what you wish to prioritise.

I personally know half a dozen couples that were London based and chose to move out on having children for all manner of reasons.

[NomduJour]

I spend most of my time in Central London. Most people I know with children of school age are now paying fees (one of whom pays for two and certainly earns less than £100k - low mortgage costs being the enabler).

Edit - virtually everyone moves out after children - property price vs space being the real driver I imagine.

Edited by NomduJour on Thursday 27th November 13:35

[Fittster]

FredClogs said:

One of my mentors sent his kids to an expensive school, one did well but is now a primary school teacher the other didn't do so well but now runs a successful business - when I spoke to him about maybe putting my eldest into private school (before the other two came along) his advice was to do it if I liked but to always remember it was my choice and any angst, anger, pressure or stress about the outcomes should ever be fed down to the child, it's not their fault.

I think a lot of people put way too much pressure on children to perform or have aspirations that they may well just not have, it's not healthy.

'one did well but is now a primary school teacher'

Since when did becoming a teacher mark someone down as a failure? Success or failure judge be personal income alone?

[FredClogs]

Fittster said:

FredClogs said:

One of my mentors sent his kids to an expensive school, one did well but is now a primary school teacher the other didn't do so well but now runs a successful business - when I spoke to him about maybe putting my eldest into private school (before the other two came along) his advice was to do it if I liked but to always remember it was my choice and any angst, anger, pressure or stress about the outcomes should ever be fed down to the child, it's not their fault.

I think a lot of people put way too much pressure on children to perform or have aspirations that they may well just not have, it's not healthy.

'one did well but is now a primary school teacher'

Since when did becoming a teacher mark someone down as a failure? Success or failure judge be personal income alone?

I entirely agree and apologies for any offense and I'm sure she's a wonderful teacher, the point being that children don't always turn out or live up to expectations and when one drops £100k on an expensive education one can't get frustrated if ones child takes their life in a direction that (perhaps) renders that £100k "wasted"

[NomduJour]

I think you are catastrophically missing the point of education.

[wolves_wanderer]

Fittster said:

'one did well but is now a primary school teacher'

Since when did becoming a teacher mark someone down as a failure? Success or failure judge be personal income alone?

What a question, on PH of all places! Earning 100k as a couple is fairly common here, if the primary school teacher isn't doing that then he's a massive failure who probably shouldn't have kids, not to mention that he works for the [looks around furtively] public sector

[Randomthoughts]

NomduJour said:

I think you are catastrophically missing the point of education.

I agree.

If someone has taken £100k of education and has opted to be one of the best primary school teachers in the country, if they genuinely are, then that £100k is well spent.

I think the only way it can be wasted is if someone ends up in jail or never succeeding at anything. Succeeding at a career that you deem to be 'trivial' isn't a failure. It's just the same reason that some people like big engines, and others deem them pointless.

[Harry H]

Chap I know with 3 kids at top private schools reckons his first £125k of salary just about pays the kids education.

Still manages to run a rather fine 50ft yacht and the holiday homes in Val d'saire and Devon mind.

[FredClogs]

Randomthoughts said:

NomduJour said:

I think you are catastrophically missing the point of education.

I agree.

If someone has taken £100k of education and has opted to be one of the best primary school teachers in the country, if they genuinely are, then that £100k is well spent.

I think the only way it can be wasted is if someone ends up in jail or never succeeding at anything. Succeeding at a career that you deem to be 'trivial' isn't a failure. It's just the same reason that some people like big engines, and others deem them pointless.

She could also be an entirely average teacher who takes massive career breaks to have her own kids then early retirement at 55, plenty do, she may never be a productive or valuable asset to the community. We just don't know.

For someone like that on a personal level, who would have probably succeeded at a state school and achieved the same level at university, could that £100k not have been better spent on a large house deposit etc...?

All I'm saying is as a parent I would find it very hard to reconcile the money I'd wasted and not allow it to damage my relationship with my kid or find myself putting them under undue pressure.

[jonny996]

heppers75 said:

oyster said:

heppers75 said:

Or you could simply choose to have the children you can afford!

Completely agree with your sentiment in general, but are you seriously suggesting there are £40k earners out there sticking to just one child in order to pay for private school fees some ten or more years later?

heppers75 said:

I am saying that there are at least some people out there that are socially responsible enough to live within their means and that includes deciding on how many kids they have based on their aspirations for those kids. As opposed to assuming they have "the right" to have as many as they like and then expect a gold plated existence and that they should all be £100K+ a year people when they grow up simply because they chose to have them and the government should see to their "rights" being supported.

It is certainly not our only rationale and as it happens we could now comfortably afford to put another 2 or 3 through that system, when we decided to have our son that was not certain and one of the reasons we chose one (outside of various none related issues) was that we wanted to ensure we could give one child the best chance in life. We might have "wanted" more but we "chose" not to give in to want and instead focus on what we could responsibly do.

There are far far far too many that do not!

oyster said:

That's a separate argument.

My point is that you need to be pretty damn wealthy to be able to afford private schooling for an average of 2 kids. (and be honest, having 2 children is hardly mass breeding is it?)

I am not really sure you do, although it depends on your definition of "pretty dam wealthy".

If you assume that to put 2 kids through an average private school with £12k a year fee's call it £26k a year net with extras. A couple on a combined income of £100k a year could do it - I can think of a couple of parents at my sons school who are probably on that sort of combined income and they have two kids at the school.

as this is PH I will throw this out there, I see many parents with kids at private schools driving cars they would rather not be in, forgoing the sun shine holidays to make sure their kids get what they feel is best for them.
Some off the people who are busy having a go at the private schools should maybe look at what the funds they use to go on the 2 holidays & drive 2 nice new cars would buy their children.
Far to many parents are completly selfish & make sure they get their luxuries first.

[NomduJour]

FredClogs said:

For someone like that on a personal level, who would have probably succeeded at a state school and achieved the same level at university, could that £100k not have been better spent on a large house deposit etc...?

All I'm saying is as a parent I would find it very hard to reconcile the money I'd wasted and not allow it to damage my relationship with my kid or find myself putting them under undue pressure

As above, you clearly don't understand what education is about.

Reminded of the children of first-generation immigrants who are pressured into getting the right grades in the right subjects just to become doctors, "lawyers", dentists, whatever.

It should not be a means to an end and fortunately most decent schools seem to know that.