Private schools, times a changing?
Discussion
CellarDoor said:
Are Labour trying to ensure that only the wealthiest can afford private education?
Who knows. There will be some idealism and for some it will be hatred. As for the outcome it's hard to say. Many schools just won't notice, some will have to increase class sizes, have more existing pupils utilise the hardship funds which may knock the number of bursaries or scholarships to less affluent children. Ultimately all that can probably be guessed is that it will have zero impact on the wealthy, be of no benefit to the poor and just another kick in the nuts to the families of middle England who are bankrolling the whole nation and being bled dry paying for everyone above and below them?DonkeyApple said:
CellarDoor said:
Are Labour trying to ensure that only the wealthiest can afford private education?
Who knows. There will be some idealism and for some it will be hatred. As for the outcome it's hard to say. Many schools just won't notice, some will have to increase class sizes, have more existing pupils utilise the hardship funds which may knock the number of bursaries or scholarships to less affluent children. Ultimately all that can probably be guessed is that it will have zero impact on the wealthy, be of no benefit to the poor and just another kick in the nuts to the families of middle England who are bankrolling the whole nation and being bled dry paying for everyone above and below them?DonkeyApple said:
CellarDoor said:
Are Labour trying to ensure that only the wealthiest can afford private education?
Who knows. There will be some idealism and for some it will be hatred. As for the outcome it's hard to say. Many schools just won't notice, some will have to increase class sizes, have more existing pupils utilise the hardship funds which may knock the number of bursaries or scholarships to less affluent children. Ultimately all that can probably be guessed is that it will have zero impact on the wealthy, be of no benefit to the poor and just another kick in the nuts to the families of middle England who are bankrolling the whole nation and being bled dry paying for everyone above and below them?Sadly there will be more to come in the way of envy taxes against anyone with the remotest ambition.
Rob 131 Sport said:
DonkeyApple said:
CellarDoor said:
Are Labour trying to ensure that only the wealthiest can afford private education?
Who knows. There will be some idealism and for some it will be hatred. As for the outcome it's hard to say. Many schools just won't notice, some will have to increase class sizes, have more existing pupils utilise the hardship funds which may knock the number of bursaries or scholarships to less affluent children. Ultimately all that can probably be guessed is that it will have zero impact on the wealthy, be of no benefit to the poor and just another kick in the nuts to the families of middle England who are bankrolling the whole nation and being bled dry paying for everyone above and below them?Sadly there will be more to come in the way of envy taxes against anyone with the remotest ambition.
Talksteer said:
Rob 131 Sport said:
DonkeyApple said:
CellarDoor said:
Are Labour trying to ensure that only the wealthiest can afford private education?
Who knows. There will be some idealism and for some it will be hatred. As for the outcome it's hard to say. Many schools just won't notice, some will have to increase class sizes, have more existing pupils utilise the hardship funds which may knock the number of bursaries or scholarships to less affluent children. Ultimately all that can probably be guessed is that it will have zero impact on the wealthy, be of no benefit to the poor and just another kick in the nuts to the families of middle England who are bankrolling the whole nation and being bled dry paying for everyone above and below them?Sadly there will be more to come in the way of envy taxes against anyone with the remotest ambition.
Literally no one is suggesting banning the schools.
It’ll just make the problem worse. More kids to find space for and an even more elite system than the one that existed already.
It’s just going to become even more ‘pay to play’ - the school my son is heading to gives out £5m a year to help with fees for smart children that can’t afford it, and pays for the entirety of over 100 kids fees - it would be fairly unlikely that will continue at the same scale.
It’s just going to become even more ‘pay to play’ - the school my son is heading to gives out £5m a year to help with fees for smart children that can’t afford it, and pays for the entirety of over 100 kids fees - it would be fairly unlikely that will continue at the same scale.
okgo said:
It’ll just make the problem worse. More kids to find space for and an even more elite system than the one that existed already.
It’s just going to become even more ‘pay to play’ - the school my son is heading to gives out £5m a year to help with fees for smart children that can’t afford it, and pays for the entirety of over 100 kids fees - it would be fairly unlikely that will continue at the same scale.
Surely anyone who can afford it now, can afford it with an increase, and if they can’t, they’ll be just like the rest of the country?It’s just going to become even more ‘pay to play’ - the school my son is heading to gives out £5m a year to help with fees for smart children that can’t afford it, and pays for the entirety of over 100 kids fees - it would be fairly unlikely that will continue at the same scale.
I fail to see the issue. Anyone who can’t afford it, can’t go. It’s how everything works.
Who wouldn’t love to buy a 911 without VAT on it?
p1stonhead said:
okgo said:
It’ll just make the problem worse. More kids to find space for and an even more elite system than the one that existed already.
It’s just going to become even more ‘pay to play’ - the school my son is heading to gives out £5m a year to help with fees for smart children that can’t afford it, and pays for the entirety of over 100 kids fees - it would be fairly unlikely that will continue at the same scale.
Surely anyone who can afford it now, can afford it with an increase, and if they can’t, they’ll be just like the rest of the country?It’s just going to become even more ‘pay to play’ - the school my son is heading to gives out £5m a year to help with fees for smart children that can’t afford it, and pays for the entirety of over 100 kids fees - it would be fairly unlikely that will continue at the same scale.
I fail to see the issue. Anyone who can’t afford it, can’t go. It’s how everything works.
Who wouldn’t love to buy a 911 without VAT on it?
The cost of Starmer's jump to the rump has been estimated as £1.6bn what's the estimated tax take increase?
An issue with this daft envy policy is that schools are closing and their work within their community, which they carry out at no cost (charitably) will cease.
p1stonhead said:
Surely anyone who can afford it now, can afford it with an increase, and if they can’t, they’ll be just like the rest of the country?
I fail to see the issue. Anyone who can’t afford it, can’t go. It’s how everything works.
Who wouldn’t love to buy a 911 without VAT on it?
You’ve ruled yourself out of being listened to with that post tbh. I fail to see the issue. Anyone who can’t afford it, can’t go. It’s how everything works.
Who wouldn’t love to buy a 911 without VAT on it?
Talksteer said:
Just to remind you they are talking about removing a tax break that helps the rich maintain their positions of power over generations. Nobody is saying that you can't educate your child privately just that you aren't going to get a tax break to do so
It is not a tax break - education has never been subject to Value Added Tax and no other component of education will be subjected to itIndependent education is not, despite what Philipson, Reeves, Rayner etc al would have you believe, the preserve of the rich. Independent schools - even the elite ones - have a few pupils in each year who are from genuinely rich families, a few who could never afford Independent education but for bursaries, scholarships and immense sacrifice on the part of their parents and a majority of children from affluent but not wealthy backgrounds where parents (and often the wider family) are making hard choices to find the money to pay the fees because they want the best for their kids
As for your "positions of power" point, I hate to tell you this, but the "old school tie" thing ceased to be anything other than a left- wing trope about 40 years ago
Ken_Code said:
TUS373 said:
If that is the case though.....the rich carry on. As the post above say....its those who strive the most that will take the knock. It makes it a more of a two tier education system than less so.
Why this assumption that the rich don’t “strive”?okgo said:
p1stonhead said:
Surely anyone who can afford it now, can afford it with an increase, and if they can’t, they’ll be just like the rest of the country?
I fail to see the issue. Anyone who can’t afford it, can’t go. It’s how everything works.
Who wouldn’t love to buy a 911 without VAT on it?
You’ve ruled yourself out of being listened to with that post tbh. I fail to see the issue. Anyone who can’t afford it, can’t go. It’s how everything works.
Who wouldn’t love to buy a 911 without VAT on it?
It was an example of another ultra luxury that rich people buy.
And private schools for the wealthy having charity status is the whole point. Completely mad
The entire argument will simply be the wealthy vs everyone else.
All the worlds tiniest violins couldn’t hope to cope with it.
Edited by p1stonhead on Saturday 25th May 10:35
Talksteer said:
Rob 131 Sport said:
DonkeyApple said:
CellarDoor said:
Are Labour trying to ensure that only the wealthiest can afford private education?
Who knows. There will be some idealism and for some it will be hatred. As for the outcome it's hard to say. Many schools just won't notice, some will have to increase class sizes, have more existing pupils utilise the hardship funds which may knock the number of bursaries or scholarships to less affluent children. Ultimately all that can probably be guessed is that it will have zero impact on the wealthy, be of no benefit to the poor and just another kick in the nuts to the families of middle England who are bankrolling the whole nation and being bled dry paying for everyone above and below them?Sadly there will be more to come in the way of envy taxes against anyone with the remotest ambition.
However, we are all intelligent people here whether public or state schooled so we naturally understand that all too often ideals don't withstand first contact with reality and have unintended consequences that are all too often negative.
My view is that we should start by looking at who is currently benefiting from the tax break. We can also also if it is even a tax break at all.
To address the latter, to be a tax break there needs to be a taxed alternative. There actually isn't here. The alternative is the state education where there is no VAT as there are no direct fees paid. So technically, public schools are not receiving a tax break at all, they just aren't being taxed as much as they mechanically could be.
To the former, who is currently benefiting? The natural perception in U.K. society is that all public schools are the same. They are all just like Eton, Radley, Marlborough (or special needs academies for the globally unwanted or dim like Stowe and Harrow;)) but this couldn't be further from the truth at all. The majority are very modest, locally parochial enterprises which rather than being filled with the national and global income elite who will not ever notice any additional level of taxation, they are instead populated by the children of local families and business owners, managers and many of their children will form the same essential community backbone of not where they grew up then in some other modest region. Very many are just prep schools where a fair proportion of students do subsequently move into the state system in some areas and deliver a clear benefit to such schools. And many are merely 6th form colleges which take excellent state school children and deliver the best possible opportunity to get them into a Russel university and in to being proper tax payers.
So who does a 20% tax levy on fees benefit and and who does it punish?
Well, it doesn't benefit those not in the public school system. Taxing one type of school isn't going to increase the quality or results of the other so this is no direct benefit to the children of the U.K. Is it going to benefit the pupils at normal public schools? Of course not. What it is actually going to do is reduce diversity and enhance the risk of elitism, which we have seen within the normal London public school network where normal families with normal values and normal children have been priced out by the excessive global demand. Is it going to be an obstacle or deterrent to the genuinely wealthy? Of course not, 20% increase isn't remotely relevant and if anything it will incentivise even more to buy in from overseas.
So what you can see is that it is only going to impact upon local public schools who cater for local families and potentially have long term ramifications for local communities as most public schools around the U.K. don't cater for the global elite but to the local shop owners, businesses, doctors, accountants etc etc who tend to spend locally, invest locally and have children who go on to do the same and all while mixing seamlessly with their local state school peers. And the other long term local effect will be that more pupils from poor families will be pushed out of the grammar school opportunity for social mobility.
My fear is that it will make normal public schools elitist as they drop the search for pupils from normal, modest households and focus only on those from abnormally wealthy while at the other end the brightest and best in the state system lose their opportunity to go to a grammar school and the reward of a great start in life.
This was born from a desire to end the charitable status which was instrumental in giving education opportunity to so many disadvantaged children while also softening the cultural divide in the U.K. between the haves and have nots. That was pure hate. One would have to be genuinely evil to want to stop working and lower middle class children from having one of the greatest opportunities in life. Those sick people are behind this VAT tax and it exists to buy them off not to help the children of middle England or to limit the social divide but to enhance it, bring it back!!!
These are the same people who destroyed the social mobility of the university system, the great leveller where an intelligent child from the state system could spend three years at no cost to become an equal to a child who randomly got lucky to the family they were born to. This huge social value has been destroyed and universities have been turned into elitist venues where the intelligent but poor are excluded by virtue of the crippling cost. It is truly terrible what has happened to the university system which was once a great and vital social leveller for young adults. The architects of that fall should be asset stripped, beaten and then shot for what they have forever destroyed.
And the parochial, middle of the road public school is that same social leveller. They aren't havens of the global, untaxed elite but institutions that support the local families who pay vast sums in taxes already as well as true golden opportunities for the less well off locally. And they keep the limited number of grammar school places free for those who truly deserve them. And we risk damaging that. There's no punishment of the super wealthy and no benefit for the poor, it's just another attack on social mobility that will enhance the prospects of the super wealthy while diminishing those of the poor.
It's unintelligent.
There is room for taxation in the private school system beyond the offering of bursaries and scholarships and the forced use of facilities. Just like there is room for university fees but application must be intelligent. This doesn't appear to be.
p1stonhead said:
Talksteer said:
Rob 131 Sport said:
DonkeyApple said:
CellarDoor said:
Are Labour trying to ensure that only the wealthiest can afford private education?
Who knows. There will be some idealism and for some it will be hatred. As for the outcome it's hard to say. Many schools just won't notice, some will have to increase class sizes, have more existing pupils utilise the hardship funds which may knock the number of bursaries or scholarships to less affluent children. Ultimately all that can probably be guessed is that it will have zero impact on the wealthy, be of no benefit to the poor and just another kick in the nuts to the families of middle England who are bankrolling the whole nation and being bled dry paying for everyone above and below them?Sadly there will be more to come in the way of envy taxes against anyone with the remotest ambition.
.
"removing a tax break that helps the rich maintain their positions of power over generations"
That is utterly hilarious.
At UK independent schools, you'll find ten children of immigrants who arrived here with nothing for every toff. At the one my children attend there might be two or three "oid money" everyone else is from working families.
God help our country if that is the level of intelligence of our voters.
Louis Balfour said:
p1stonhead said:
Talksteer said:
Rob 131 Sport said:
DonkeyApple said:
CellarDoor said:
Are Labour trying to ensure that only the wealthiest can afford private education?
Who knows. There will be some idealism and for some it will be hatred. As for the outcome it's hard to say. Many schools just won't notice, some will have to increase class sizes, have more existing pupils utilise the hardship funds which may knock the number of bursaries or scholarships to less affluent children. Ultimately all that can probably be guessed is that it will have zero impact on the wealthy, be of no benefit to the poor and just another kick in the nuts to the families of middle England who are bankrolling the whole nation and being bled dry paying for everyone above and below them?Sadly there will be more to come in the way of envy taxes against anyone with the remotest ambition.
.
"removing a tax break that helps the rich maintain their positions of power over generations"
That is utterly hilarious.
At UK independent schools, you'll find ten children of immigrants who arrived here with nothing for every toff. At the one my children attend there might be two or three "oid money" everyone else is from working families.
God help our country if that is the level of intelligence of our voters.
p1stonhead said:
Louis Balfour said:
p1stonhead said:
Talksteer said:
Rob 131 Sport said:
DonkeyApple said:
CellarDoor said:
Are Labour trying to ensure that only the wealthiest can afford private education?
Who knows. There will be some idealism and for some it will be hatred. As for the outcome it's hard to say. Many schools just won't notice, some will have to increase class sizes, have more existing pupils utilise the hardship funds which may knock the number of bursaries or scholarships to less affluent children. Ultimately all that can probably be guessed is that it will have zero impact on the wealthy, be of no benefit to the poor and just another kick in the nuts to the families of middle England who are bankrolling the whole nation and being bled dry paying for everyone above and below them?Sadly there will be more to come in the way of envy taxes against anyone with the remotest ambition.
.
"removing a tax break that helps the rich maintain their positions of power over generations"
That is utterly hilarious.
At UK independent schools, you'll find ten children of immigrants who arrived here with nothing for every toff. At the one my children attend there might be two or three "oid money" everyone else is from working families.
God help our country if that is the level of intelligence of our voters.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff