Private schools, times a changing?
Discussion
Remove pin from grenade...
I find the simple line between 'rich' and everyone else much too simplistic. The late great Felix Dennis covered this in his masterpiece How to get Rich, which is a must-read (but only if you fancy getting rich...)
Based on the comments above and Mr Dennis' work, I would suggest there are people whose lives will be affected by a 20% bump in fees and those not. Based on my experience (paying for private West London day schools and boarding school), the former will be heavily affected and zero of the latter. There will be a trickle-down effect as people sell off property near those day schools and move to areas with better state education (mainly suburban areas of our biggest cities). This will obviously make prices more affordable in areas where people don't want to live and driving up the cost where they move to..
One other comment. I would be really really considerate of 'weaponising' wealth creation. None of us like the idea of lazy oligarchs leaving empty flats across the country - but I personally feel the benefit of very wealthy people paying tax much more than the negative impact of their presence
I find the simple line between 'rich' and everyone else much too simplistic. The late great Felix Dennis covered this in his masterpiece How to get Rich, which is a must-read (but only if you fancy getting rich...)
Based on the comments above and Mr Dennis' work, I would suggest there are people whose lives will be affected by a 20% bump in fees and those not. Based on my experience (paying for private West London day schools and boarding school), the former will be heavily affected and zero of the latter. There will be a trickle-down effect as people sell off property near those day schools and move to areas with better state education (mainly suburban areas of our biggest cities). This will obviously make prices more affordable in areas where people don't want to live and driving up the cost where they move to..
One other comment. I would be really really considerate of 'weaponising' wealth creation. None of us like the idea of lazy oligarchs leaving empty flats across the country - but I personally feel the benefit of very wealthy people paying tax much more than the negative impact of their presence
p1stonhead said:
This must be some of the ‘we’re altruistic/doing the state a favour with private schools’ type of point of view we keep hearing about 
Apart from proving you could have done with some extra schooling, why are you suddenly in this thread?You also would do well to look at how schooling prices have outstripped wage growth.
okgo said:
p1stonhead said:
This must be some of the ‘we’re altruistic/doing the state a favour with private schools’ type of point of view we keep hearing about
Apart from proving you could have done with some extra schooling, why are you suddenly in this thread?You also would do well to look at how schooling prices have outstripped wage growth.
Classic.
okgo said:
p1stonhead said:
“Hur dur dur anyone who doesn’t agree rich people getting private business VAT discounts is stupid”
Classic.
Your arguments have been remarkably short sighted and without any real critical thought. That’s why I was puzzled. Classic.
Why is this controversial? The schools won’t be affected. Those paying will be.
And I’m sure most will afford it just fine. If they can’t well that’s just how capitalism works isn’t it? Nearly everyone already can’t afford it.
Leithen said:
Indeed.
VAT on school fees is simply a tax grab on those who already subsidise state education to the tune of billions.
It’s a political move that will raise a small amount of tax, play well with Labour’s class believers, but do little or nothing to improve education for anyone.
And of course it will widen the education gap and make private provision even more elitist. But that’s fine for certain politicians because grievance is good.
Yes - classic beggar-my-neighbour Socialism; they see no wrong in making the poor and disadvantaged poorer and more disadvantaged so long as the rich and privileged are less rich and privileged VAT on school fees is simply a tax grab on those who already subsidise state education to the tune of billions.
It’s a political move that will raise a small amount of tax, play well with Labour’s class believers, but do little or nothing to improve education for anyone.
And of course it will widen the education gap and make private provision even more elitist. But that’s fine for certain politicians because grievance is good.
p1stonhead said:
Unless I’m mistaken, there is no proposal for schools to lose their charitable status and therefore pay VAT on what they buy. It’s just for their customers.
Why is this controversial? The schools won’t be affected. Those paying will be.
And I’m sure most will afford it just fine. If they can’t well that’s just how capitalism works isn’t it? Nearly everyone already can’t afford it.
There’s pages and pages of why it’s probably not a great idea. Why is this controversial? The schools won’t be affected. Those paying will be.
And I’m sure most will afford it just fine. If they can’t well that’s just how capitalism works isn’t it? Nearly everyone already can’t afford it.
okgo said:
p1stonhead said:
Unless I’m mistaken, there is no proposal for schools to lose their charitable status and therefore pay VAT on what they buy. It’s just for their customers.
Why is this controversial? The schools won’t be affected. Those paying will be.
And I’m sure most will afford it just fine. If they can’t well that’s just how capitalism works isn’t it? Nearly everyone already can’t afford it.
There’s pages and pages of why it’s probably not a great idea. Why is this controversial? The schools won’t be affected. Those paying will be.
And I’m sure most will afford it just fine. If they can’t well that’s just how capitalism works isn’t it? Nearly everyone already can’t afford it.
I suspect most will keep their head down and simply pay it, like they’ve had to do with energy bills, mortgages and pretty much everything else.
page3 said:
borcy said:
page3 said:
How would VAT on independent schools that are funded by local government work? Wouldn’t it be an own goal?
What do you mean by local gov work?TownIdiot said:
I'd also have thought many state schools would benefit from having more kids with engaged and motivated parents.
I'm afraid, that's one of the misnomers. Firstly, the children with those parents will just stay and the parents cut back more elsewhere and secondly, those that can't cut back any more will take up grammar school places. And, if parents were to opt for state then they would move to the catchment of one of the ones that already has no need for improvement. The other fallacy is that all the parents of public school children are engaged in their children's academia. I'm afraid that these days many are very much not. There is no upside for the state system or its participants other than schadenfreude.
I read a couple of threads on Twitter/X this morning on private schools and the vitriol and hate being spewed by some of the “be kind” socialists was almost shocking
Clearly “taxing the rich” is very popular with some of the Labour voters
I have zero skin in the game, I went to a state school in a northern mill town and don’t have any kids in private schools
There are a few private schools in the area, one is world famous/renowned (Stonyhurst) and I doubt very much its clientele would be much affected by additional fees. Although I do have.a friend with a son there as a day student, who is equally as working class as me, but is a self employed builder who’s seemingly doing ok for himself. I don’t know what his capacity to absorb extra fees would be
Otherwise the private schools around here in Lancs aren’t the bastions of the super rich but full of kids from ordinary families where parents have made some very significant sacrifices to avoid the increasingly sectarian state sector
I do know a few people in that category and know that they are really trying hard to do their best for their kids
People have this idea that private schools equal millionaires and Eton but up here in the north it really couldn’t be further from that preconception
They also do a lot for the local communities beyond offering scholarships and reduced fees for some students such as their sports facilities being open to locals outside school hours etc
A couple have closed in recent years locally
It will certainly be interesting to see what the fallout is and what the unintended consequences are
Clearly “taxing the rich” is very popular with some of the Labour voters
I have zero skin in the game, I went to a state school in a northern mill town and don’t have any kids in private schools
There are a few private schools in the area, one is world famous/renowned (Stonyhurst) and I doubt very much its clientele would be much affected by additional fees. Although I do have.a friend with a son there as a day student, who is equally as working class as me, but is a self employed builder who’s seemingly doing ok for himself. I don’t know what his capacity to absorb extra fees would be
Otherwise the private schools around here in Lancs aren’t the bastions of the super rich but full of kids from ordinary families where parents have made some very significant sacrifices to avoid the increasingly sectarian state sector
I do know a few people in that category and know that they are really trying hard to do their best for their kids
People have this idea that private schools equal millionaires and Eton but up here in the north it really couldn’t be further from that preconception
They also do a lot for the local communities beyond offering scholarships and reduced fees for some students such as their sports facilities being open to locals outside school hours etc
A couple have closed in recent years locally
It will certainly be interesting to see what the fallout is and what the unintended consequences are
DonkeyApple said:
I'm afraid, that's one of the misnomers. Firstly, the children with those parents will just stay and the parents cut back more elsewhere and secondly, those that can't cut back any more will take up grammar school places. And, if parents were to opt for state then they would move to the catchment of one of the ones that already has no need for improvement. The other fallacy is that all the parents of public school children are engaged in their children's academia. I'm afraid that these days many are very much not.
There is no upside for the state system or its participants other than schadenfreude.
A quick google suggest 5% of families have the option of state grammar schools. So that avenue is closed for the vast majority. Moving will likely cost more in tax than new VAT saved.There is no upside for the state system or its participants other than schadenfreude.
I'd also suggest that those parents who are struggling to pay the fees are very much engaged in their children's education, whilst accepting that many parents aren't.
TownIdiot said:
A quick google suggest 5% of families have the option of state grammar schools. So that avenue is closed for the vast majority. Moving will likely cost more in tax than new VAT saved.
I'd also suggest that those parents who are struggling to pay the fees are very much engaged in their children's education, whilst accepting that many parents aren't.
I’d say they are the most engaged I'd also suggest that those parents who are struggling to pay the fees are very much engaged in their children's education, whilst accepting that many parents aren't.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff