Rishi Sunak - Prime Minister

[PlywoodPascal]

768 said:

But if they go to the free one we have to pay for it, without any extra money.

Presumably you're in favour of universities paying VAT too, they can attend the university of life for free.

Universities do pay VAT

[dundarach]

valiant said:

dundarach said:

valiant said:

Why would every privately educated kid go to state school?

Labour are not proposing to close them down.

In reality a large part of the 7% of kids that are privately educated will remain in private schools as parents can still afford it and others will make the necessary changes to keep their kids in school and a few will end up in public schools (Oh, the horror!)

Despite many here making a big deal and that’s it’s somehow a major and central plank of Labour policy (despite no manifesto being released), it is a minor change that most don’t really care about especially when the NHS is on its knees, public schools are falling down, the cost of living crisis hasn’t gone away but no, it’s the plight of privately educated kids where this election will be fought on

It will for me, my dead mums paying their fees, we haven't any more to chuck in, they'll either have to go to state schools or their private one will have to cap fees, it's that simple.

And then your kids will be one of the 93%. They will still get an education.

Yep, my response was simply saying it is a big deal to me as I could never afford to send them, had my mum not left almost enough to do that. I could have bought a lovely classic car, however divorce would have been more expensive!

All being well I'll drop dead soon and not have to worry about things

[Caddyshack]

PlywoodPascal said:

768 said:

But if they go to the free one we have to pay for it, without any extra money.

Presumably you're in favour of universities paying VAT too, they can attend the university of life for free.

Universities do pay VAT

Clearly they meant students paying VAT on fees.

[Sway]

Caddyshack said:

The bit you have quoted was just poorly worded by me, I do not receive a benefit of tax as it stands, I just don’t pay VAT, I receive no benefit currently.

Try and think of something that you do consume but then you also pay for via your taxes and you may then get the concept.

You pay for the NHS but you opt to not use their service and pay for a private operation, maybe that operation shouldn’t be attracting VAT to encourage you to take the pressure off the NHS…?

It’s NOT about paying for something that you do not consume ever. It’s about paying AND then paying vat when you consume the alternative which reduces pressure on the bit you are paying for to the benefit of others.

Edited by Caddyshack on Wednesday 22 May 20:42

Agreed.

Tax is as much about influencing the actions of the populace as it is generating revenue.

Do we really want to discourage people sending kids to private schools and reducing the pressures on the state system?

[silentbrown]

valiant said:

... public schools are falling down...

state schools!

"public school" has a different meaning here.

[President Merkin]

Sway said:

Prolex-UK said:

President Merkin said:

I genuinely believe the number of fks the general public couldn't give about vat on private schools is going to come as a massive shock to a dozen or so broken records on here.

+1

As with a fair few things, what are fairly populist policies sometimes get enacted - only for those people who really couldn't give a fk (or actively supported the changes) to somewhat regret the unintended consequences that hit closer to home...

As with closing down the Assisted Places scheme, all it does is reduce social mobility - and in this case, with fairly flimsy economic basis to do so.

QV Brexit. Noted that the 6% crowd up in arms over this are a crossover crew wholly relaxed about that if the proponents in here are any guide. Populist policies my arse.

And the argument doesn't stack up anyway. 93% not involved, so I'm right about the general public and private schools are in any event by a country mile the biggest barrier to social mobility once you look at who occupies the top jobs in this country. & that's me kindly ignoring the bald faced lie in your argument.

State school rolls set to fall fast in the next decade, so plenty of room & lucky for you, a Labour admin set to fund it anyway. Sorry about your lost privilege, I guess you guys will just have to find ways to motivate your kids to succeed like the vast majority have to puzzle out.

Still, very happy for you all to fixate on this to the point of obsession, it's all grist to the mill when it comes to the twitching corpse of the Tories and the truth of where their priorities lie.

[valiant]

silentbrown said:

valiant said:

... public schools are falling down...

state schools!

"public school" has a different meaning here.

D’oh!

I am ‘here’ as well.

Best not use me as an example of state education then!

[768]

p1stonhead said:

768 said:

Washes pretty fking quickly when they take up state places.

Only the destitute people who can’t afford the 20% rise surely?

Maybe they should stop eating avocado toast?

You can call them destitute. You can cast aspersions on their spending habits. And you can pay extra tax to school them in the state sector. But what you can't do is stop them taking state school places that will either push other kids out of good state schools or increase class sizes.

[EddieSteadyGo]

Sway said:

Agreed.

Tax is as much about influencing the actions of the populace as it is generating revenue.

Do we really want to discourage people sending kids to private schools and reducing the pressures on the state system?

The subtext of this policy is exactly to discourage the use of private schools.

[Caddyshack]

768 said:

p1stonhead said:

768 said:

Washes pretty fking quickly when they take up state places.

Only the destitute people who can’t afford the 20% rise surely?

Maybe they should stop eating avocado toast?

You can call them destitute. You can cast aspersions on their spending habits. And you can pay extra tax to school them in the state sector. But what you can't do is stop them taking state school places that will either push other kids out of good state schools or increase class sizes.

Quite right!!!!

I find it odd that people look in and say "oh they can afford it" as if everyone must be rolling in it.

It may have escaped the notice of a lucky few but there has been a huge rise in the cost of living, some mortgages have doubled in cost whilst energy prices have gone through the roof, the private school fees have gone up massively already over the last 3 years, by more than 20% already, add another 20% and the pips might start to squeak. Some people have 2 or 3 kids in private education…there is one family with 6 at my daughters school but they are lucky enough not to have to worry about money, some of us will very much notice another £500 pm on top of all the other costs.

[p1stonhead]

Caddyshack said:

768 said:

p1stonhead said:

768 said:

Washes pretty fking quickly when they take up state places.

Only the destitute people who can’t afford the 20% rise surely?

Maybe they should stop eating avocado toast?

You can call them destitute. You can cast aspersions on their spending habits. And you can pay extra tax to school them in the state sector. But what you can't do is stop them taking state school places that will either push other kids out of good state schools or increase class sizes.

Quite right!!!!

I find it odd that people look in and say "oh they can afford it" as if everyone must be rolling in it.

It may have escaped the notice of a lucky few but there has been a huge rise in the cost of living, some mortgages have doubled in cost whilst energy prices have gone through the roof, the private school fees have gone up massively already over the last 3 years, by more than 20% already, add another 20% and the pips might start to squeak. Some people have 2 or 3 kids in private education…there is one family with 6 at my daughters school but they are lucky enough not to have to worry about money, some of us will very much notice another £500 pm on top of all the other costs.

Exactly why approximately 93% of the country couldn’t give a toss about a rise in costs in OPTIONAL £20k a year school fees, or heating one’s stables, or running one’s G63.

[Rivenink]

Caddyshack said:

768 said:

p1stonhead said:

768 said:

Washes pretty fking quickly when they take up state places.

Only the destitute people who can’t afford the 20% rise surely?

Maybe they should stop eating avocado toast?

You can call them destitute. You can cast aspersions on their spending habits. And you can pay extra tax to school them in the state sector. But what you can't do is stop them taking state school places that will either push other kids out of good state schools or increase class sizes.

Quite right!!!!

I find it odd that people look in and say "oh they can afford it" as if everyone must be rolling in it.

It may have escaped the notice of a lucky few but there has been a huge rise in the cost of living, some mortgages have doubled in cost whilst energy prices have gone through the roof, the private school fees have gone up massively already over the last 3 years, by more than 20% already, add another 20% and the pips might start to squeak. Some people have 2 or 3 kids in private education…there is one family with 6 at my daughters school but they are lucky enough not to have to worry about money, some of us will very much notice another £500 pm on top of all the other costs.

Maybe you need to look at it from the perspective of the majority of families on low to average incomes, to whom the idea of sending their kids to private school is usually followed by other day dreams of what they'd do if they won the lottery.

If you seriously think familes that have had to make choices about eating or heating in the last couple of years will have any sympathy for the plight of those wealthy enough to send their kids to private school having to pay 20% VAT on the fees, you're deluded.

Yes, you might be working hard to provide the best for your family. Yes you might have had to make financial sacrifices for them. But at the end of the day, your kids are getting a privilege the vast majority of kids in this country won't ever get, and can barely even dream of getting.

[EddieSteadyGo]

Caddyshack said:

Quite right!!!!

I find it odd that people look in and say "oh they can afford it" as if everyone must be rolling in it.

It may have escaped the notice of a lucky few but there has been a huge rise in the cost of living, some mortgages have doubled in cost whilst energy prices have gone through the roof, the private school fees have gone up massively already over the last 3 years, by more than 20% already, add another 20% and the pips might start to squeak. Some people have 2 or 3 kids in private education…there is one family with 6 at my daughters school but they are lucky enough not to have to worry about money, some of us will very much notice another £500 pm on top of all the other costs.

The main problem is you, and people like you, are the 'cash-cows'. You exist to be milked. The people who support this policy not only want the money (although despite their sanctimony, they are invariably too tight to pay a 'little more' themselves) but they also usually enjoy throwing scorn in your direction for having the temerity for prioritising your own children over yourself. Anyone demonstrating any kind of 'personal responsibility' by paying their own way is a problem, because that's "unfair".

You need to understand, it's only "ok" if you let them drag your own children down to the lowest common denominator. If everyone is doing poorly, that's better for equality.

[Caddyshack]

Rivenink said:

Caddyshack said:

768 said:

p1stonhead said:

768 said:

Washes pretty fking quickly when they take up state places.

Only the destitute people who can’t afford the 20% rise surely?

Maybe they should stop eating avocado toast?

You can call them destitute. You can cast aspersions on their spending habits. And you can pay extra tax to school them in the state sector. But what you can't do is stop them taking state school places that will either push other kids out of good state schools or increase class sizes.

Quite right!!!!

I find it odd that people look in and say "oh they can afford it" as if everyone must be rolling in it.

It may have escaped the notice of a lucky few but there has been a huge rise in the cost of living, some mortgages have doubled in cost whilst energy prices have gone through the roof, the private school fees have gone up massively already over the last 3 years, by more than 20% already, add another 20% and the pips might start to squeak. Some people have 2 or 3 kids in private education…there is one family with 6 at my daughters school but they are lucky enough not to have to worry about money, some of us will very much notice another £500 pm on top of all the other costs.

Maybe you need to look at it from the perspective of the majority of families on low to average incomes, to whom the idea of sending their kids to private school is usually followed by other day dreams of what they'd do if they won the lottery.

If you seriously think familes that have had to make choices about eating or heating in the last couple of years will have any sympathy for the plight of those wealthy enough to send their kids to private school having to pay 20% VAT on the fees, you're deluded.

Yes, you might be working hard to provide the best for your family. Yes you might have had to make financial sacrifices for them. But at the end of the day, your kids are getting a privilege the vast majority of kids in this country won't ever get, and can barely even dream of getting.

I understand but think this misses the point. I do not expect any sympathy, I just hoped that people could understand that a 20% make the affordable unaffordable for some, the rise will close some schools and put pressure on the state. The debate is whether VAT should be paid on child education or not when you already pay towards state schools.

It then went on to explore that just because your kids go to private school does not mean you can obviously just suck up 20% extra and shouldn’t moan about it.

My parents couldn’t afford private schools, they were both born in to council houses, we could not dream of that. I also understand that there are people way, way richer than us and then others that are poorer, that is just life, it doesn’t mean that everyone at private school can just suck up a 20% cost that could not have been planned for when the kids started their education.

There is a big upheaval taking any kid out of any school, having to pull your kid from all their friends and what they know will be hard for many.

We chose private school as the local comp to us had 5 head teachers in 3 years and was in special measures, it would have cost £300k plus to buy the same house in the next catchment which was about 5 miles away, we decided that we could stay put and spend the difference on what we hope is a much better educational experience, it’s not always as simple as rich people with an endless budget.

[ChocolateFrog]

Sway said:

Agreed.

Tax is as much about influencing the actions of the populace as it is generating revenue.

Do we really want to discourage people sending kids to private schools and reducing the pressures on the state system?

The money generated would more than offset the handful of kids that get to enjoy overfilled and understaffed schools with the rest of us.

It's such a weak argument that you and everyone else with skin in the game makes its laughable.

Conservatively I've make it an extra 2 billion quid, assuming average fees of £20k a year.

I think the system will cope with a few extra Wills rocking up.

[ChocolateFrog]

President Merkin said:

I genuinely believe the number of fks the general public couldn't give about vat on private schools is going to come as a massive shock to a dozen or so broken records on here.

Ain't that the truth

What your privilege is going to cost a little more? Well fk me sideways how much do you need?

[ChocolateFrog]

I tapped out of the thread on private schools when someone said (apparently deadly seriously) that all gifted children from underprivileged backgrounds were picked up by the private system.

Utterly deluded.

[EddieSteadyGo]

ChocolateFrog said:

The money generated would more than offset the handful of kids that get to enjoy overfilled and understaffed schools with the rest of us.

It's such a weak argument that you and everyone else with skin in the game makes its laughable.

Conservatively I've make it an extra 2 billion quid, assuming average fees of £20k a year.

I think the system will cope with a few extra Wills rocking up.

I'll make a bet with you that the policy will be reversed within 10 years. Pretty much every other country in Europe doesn't apply VAT to schooling for a reason. The reason is it doesn't make sense. Over time, I believe it won't raise the extra revenue you suggest because many of those people who currently choose the independent system will just move into the catchments for grammar schools etc. And they can afford to use more private tutoring etc to get better entrance grades to displace other children. In the long term, you will see the main effect as shifting house prices in those more desirable catchments, rather than extra money to the government.

[Sway]

ChocolateFrog said:

Sway said:

Agreed.

Tax is as much about influencing the actions of the populace as it is generating revenue.

Do we really want to discourage people sending kids to private schools and reducing the pressures on the state system?

The money generated would more than offset the handful of kids that get to enjoy overfilled and understaffed schools with the rest of us.

It's such a weak argument that you and everyone else with skin in the game makes its laughable.

Conservatively I've make it an extra 2 billion quid, assuming average fees of £20k a year.

I think the system will cope with a few extra Wills rocking up.

I have no 'skin in the game' - whilst I went to public school, we paid no fees. My kids have gone to decent state schools, after having to switch them out during early years primary that was an utter ballache for them.

You're making a lot of assumptions and guesses over the impact. Education is one of our best exports, and losing schools is daft.

Also, don't forget that if they levy VAT, they can also reclaim it - so your fag packet maths is way out.

Even if it were £2Bn, frankly, that's fk all considering the potential risk to the system. 3% of education budget, or 1% of NHS.

Edited by Sway on Wednesday 22 May 23:13

[Dingu]

If Tory MPs genuinely are trying to block the election they deserve to never take power again. Truly a totally thick corrupt bunch of aholes.

There should be a public enquiry into the corruption of this government with prosecutions following.