Private schools, times a changing?
Discussion
cheesejunkie said:
Just don't tell me it's an altruistic position when it's a selfish one.
Most of us (not all, I'll grant you, but the majority) aren't arguing it's an altruistic decision.It's a stupid decision if you assume it's one based on logic, which of course, it isn't - as I said it's a bone to those who want to 'bash the rich'. People who dislike Starmer because he's not far enough left and probably won't get the great social revolution they're hoping for, not least because the country's finances are in such a poor state.
However the consequences of this policy have the possibility, over time to have quite detrimental effects on the state system. There's also a case to be made for a moral benefit, but in the dozens of posts you've made over the last two days, you seem to have failed to convince many that if only there were more ex-private school parents in the state system, we'd see an improvement.
But for all the reasons already repeated ad infinitum there is a financial benefit of having a few thousand people paying income tax and then not availing themselves of one of the large beneficiaries of that tax.
EmBe said:
Most of us (not all, I'll grant you, but the majority) aren't arguing it's an altruistic decision.
It's a stupid decision if you assume it's one based on logic, which of course, it isn't - as I said it's a bone to those who want to 'bash the rich'. People who dislike Starmer because he's not far enough left and probably won't get the great social revolution they're hoping for, not least because the country's finances are in such a poor state.
However the consequences of this policy have the possibility, over time to have quite detrimental effects on the state system. There's also a case to be made for a moral benefit, but in the dozens of posts you've made over the last two days, you seem to have failed to convince many that if only there were more ex-private school parents in the state system, we'd see an improvement.
But for all the reasons already repeated ad infinitum there is a financial benefit of having a few thousand people paying income tax and then not availing themselves of one of the large beneficiaries of that tax.
I don't seek to convince. I realise that's not possible. But I'm very happy to disagree and take the lashes. It's a stupid decision if you assume it's one based on logic, which of course, it isn't - as I said it's a bone to those who want to 'bash the rich'. People who dislike Starmer because he's not far enough left and probably won't get the great social revolution they're hoping for, not least because the country's finances are in such a poor state.
However the consequences of this policy have the possibility, over time to have quite detrimental effects on the state system. There's also a case to be made for a moral benefit, but in the dozens of posts you've made over the last two days, you seem to have failed to convince many that if only there were more ex-private school parents in the state system, we'd see an improvement.
But for all the reasons already repeated ad infinitum there is a financial benefit of having a few thousand people paying income tax and then not availing themselves of one of the large beneficiaries of that tax.
The policy has problems, I don't disagree. But the defenders getting so worked up about something when they wouldn't about other things are not people I feel overly worried about. Soz.
What you get out of your contributions will never be proportionate to how much you pay. Thinking supporting bypass mechanisms is helping others is not going to convince anyone with half a brain.
cheesejunkie said:
What you get out of your contributions will never be proportionate to how much you pay. Thinking supporting bypass mechanisms is helping others is not going to convince anyone with half a brain.
Again, you seem to be investing comments with more meaning than they contain. No one is suggesting that by not paying VAT on fees is 'helping' in any great way, but those of us paying school fees are by default paying a small percentage of tax for something we're not using, leaving that amount in general taxation, which in turn is used to fund state education, among many other things.Granted it's tiny and it's certainly a fool who'd try to convince you (or anyone else with half a brain
) that it's altruistic - but the argument that a few hudred parents, by your estimation, entering the state system will suddenly reverse decades of decline is equally specious and furthermore, insulting to those parents who've been trying to do that from the inside.youngsyr said:
It's a little out of date, but quite damning:
1 in 3!
Those privately educated form a higher proportion of those doing A levels and a higher proportion than that with the grades needed for a Russel group university. Sutton Trust said:
Two fifths of the elite examined here (39%) attended independent schools, more than five times as many as the population
at large (7%).
So if the elite roles were evenly distributed amongst the most intelligent, and assuming attendance at private school is independent of intelligence, you would expect 32% of the roles currently filled by privately educated individuals to be filled by stated educated individuals.at large (7%).
1 in 3!
Also attendance at a private school would not be independent of intelligence due to the fact many are selective.
EmBe said:
cheesejunkie said:
What you get out of your contributions will never be proportionate to how much you pay. Thinking supporting bypass mechanisms is helping others is not going to convince anyone with half a brain.
Again, you seem to be investing comments with more meaning than they contain. No one is suggesting that by not paying VAT on fees is 'helping' in any great way, but those of us paying school fees are by default paying a small percentage of tax for something we're not using, leaving that amount in general taxation, which in turn is used to fund state education, among many other things.Granted it's tiny and it's certainly a fool who'd try to convince you (or anyone else with half a brain
) that it's altruistic - but the argument that a few hudred parents, by your estimation, entering the state system will suddenly reverse decades of decline is equally specious and furthermore, insulting to those parents who've been trying to do that from the inside.
t.Some are suggesting their payment of school fees are subsidising others who don't. They're wrong if they think that by subsidising thhemselves is helping others. My problem with them doing it is not that they do it, it's that they try to say it's for my benefit. It isn't.
EmBe said:
Again, you seem to be investing comments with more meaning than they contain. No one is suggesting that by not paying VAT on fees is 'helping' in any great way, but [b]those of us paying school fees are by default paying a small percentage of tax for something we're not using, leaving that amount in general taxation, which in turn is used to fund state education, among many other things.
Granted it's tiny[/b] and it's certainly a fool who'd try to convince you (or anyone else with half a brain ) that it's altruistic - but the argument that a few hudred parents, by your estimation, entering the state system will suddenly reverse decades of decline is equally specious and furthermore, insulting to those parents who've been trying to do that from the inside.
It's not tiny though. Around 11% of government expenditure is spent on education, £131 billion in the current year. So 11% of what us 'posh rich types with the thick kids' are paying in tax goes towards the state education bill. I'd suggest that is quite a bit.Granted it's tiny[/b] and it's certainly a fool who'd try to convince you (or anyone else with half a brain
) that it's altruistic - but the argument that a few hudred parents, by your estimation, entering the state system will suddenly reverse decades of decline is equally specious and furthermore, insulting to those parents who've been trying to do that from the inside.(Lets ignore the SP which is more than we spend on education (priorities right?), and our national debt interest which will soon overtake the education budget on the list of things we as a country spend our money on).
Private schools enable those who can afford it to opt out of a system that benefits everyone. You are not paying tax you shouldn't have to, you are paying too little tax and enabling a political system that deprives the majority of the population of benefits.
The majority of private school parents are business owners. Perhaps there should be extra scrutiny of their tax affairs to prove that they are contributing enough? After all, it would be a terrible indictment of the system if they were dodging tax to pay for private education wouldn't it?
I think it's pretty obvious that there is no benefit to the majority of the nation from the 6-7% of children who are educated at great cost outside of the state system. The idea that it is a relief to the system to have theese kids taken out and for their wealthier than average parents to feel justified in whinging about how much tax they pay is ridiculous.
Just face facts, if you can afford to pay for your kids to go to private school, you could afford to pay more tax. So the obvious solution is to tax private schools out of existence, tax rich people more, put that money into education, educate our nation better for the benefit of everyone.
It's not that difficult.
The majority of private school parents are business owners. Perhaps there should be extra scrutiny of their tax affairs to prove that they are contributing enough? After all, it would be a terrible indictment of the system if they were dodging tax to pay for private education wouldn't it?
I think it's pretty obvious that there is no benefit to the majority of the nation from the 6-7% of children who are educated at great cost outside of the state system. The idea that it is a relief to the system to have theese kids taken out and for their wealthier than average parents to feel justified in whinging about how much tax they pay is ridiculous.
Just face facts, if you can afford to pay for your kids to go to private school, you could afford to pay more tax. So the obvious solution is to tax private schools out of existence, tax rich people more, put that money into education, educate our nation better for the benefit of everyone.
It's not that difficult.
ooid said:
cheesejunkie said:
That’s one interpretation. Another is that I didn’t call anyone thick but pointed out that some are more entitled to be thick than others due to parental wealth.
There is no interpretation, you did called 'thick' and throw further assaults. You are still going on, quite awkward to say something like 'entitled to be thick due to parental wealth' 
cheesejunkie said:
Private education doesn't exist in many countries. Were it not to exist here you can be damn sure public education would get more prominence. Some's unwillingness to understand that very simple point is, as mentioned, revealing.
Let me enlighten your ignorance on that subject. (can't help with others, you seem to be a lost cause on multi dimensions).Finland, (non-private school system) has one of the most difficult admission process for its universities. Their young population has been behind in Europe for higher education access, as they had no chance to enter. Many chose to come to U.K. or Germany for that reason (well, I have educated a few, brilliant people).
My worst school review was taciturn.
I know how some will find that hard to believe. But I know when to keep my mouth shut and am very capable of doing so
Glad to hear you've educated a few, hoping you haven't successfully educated them and not into incorrect opinions. Yes I'll look.
cheesejunkie said:
Again, apologies for giving a st.
Some are suggesting their payment of school fees are subsidising others who don't. They're wrong if they think that by subsidising thhemselves is helping others. My problem with them doing it is not that they do it, it's that they try to say it's for my benefit. It isn't.
Can you quote someone saying they send their children to private school for altruistic reasons? I haven't seen anyone. t.Some are suggesting their payment of school fees are subsidising others who don't. They're wrong if they think that by subsidising thhemselves is helping others. My problem with them doing it is not that they do it, it's that they try to say it's for my benefit. It isn't.
dimots said:
Private schools enable those who can afford it to opt out of a system that benefits everyone. You are not paying tax you shouldn't have to, you are paying too little tax and enabling a political system that deprives the majority of the population of benefits.
The majority of private school parents are business owners. Perhaps there should be extra scrutiny of their tax affairs to prove that they are contributing enough? After all, it would be a terrible indictment of the system if they were dodging tax to pay for private education wouldn't it?
I think it's pretty obvious that there is no benefit to the majority of the nation from the 6-7% of children who are educated at great cost outside of the state system. The idea that it is a relief to the system to have theese kids taken out and for their wealthier than average parents to feel justified in whinging about how much tax they pay is ridiculous.
Just face facts, if you can afford to pay for your kids to go to private school, you could afford to pay more tax. So the obvious solution is to tax private schools out of existence, tax rich people more, put that money into education, educate our nation better for the benefit of everyone.
It's not that difficult.
So it is just envy then.The majority of private school parents are business owners. Perhaps there should be extra scrutiny of their tax affairs to prove that they are contributing enough? After all, it would be a terrible indictment of the system if they were dodging tax to pay for private education wouldn't it?
I think it's pretty obvious that there is no benefit to the majority of the nation from the 6-7% of children who are educated at great cost outside of the state system. The idea that it is a relief to the system to have theese kids taken out and for their wealthier than average parents to feel justified in whinging about how much tax they pay is ridiculous.
Just face facts, if you can afford to pay for your kids to go to private school, you could afford to pay more tax. So the obvious solution is to tax private schools out of existence, tax rich people more, put that money into education, educate our nation better for the benefit of everyone.
It's not that difficult.
Mr Penguin said:
Can you quote someone saying they send their children to private school for altruistic reasons? I haven't seen anyone.
No. I can quote a few suggesting that they're doing the world a service by seeing their kids to private schools.Spot the difference or willing fully ignore it.
I see no evil, I see biased people.
M1AGM said:
If thats not satire then you take the prize for the biggest chip. How do you know that most parents are business owners, and how would they be dodging taxes to pay school fees? And how do you know the disposable incomes of everyone? Remarkable prejudice. Are you Angela?
Old stats, but here you go:https://www.pepf.co.uk/fact-finder/facts-and-figur...
The large majority (around 87%) of pupils at private schools come from parents who are business owners, or have professional and managerial backgrounds. The proportions have not changed much for a long time.
The below table shows the proportions of pupils according to family background.
FAMILY BACKGROUND 2004 2014
Managerial & professional 77% 78%
Intermediate occupations 5% 6%
Small Employers 7% 9%
Routine and manual occupations 6% 4%
Not working/unknown 5% 3%
dimots said:
Private schools enable those who can afford it to opt out of a system that benefits everyone. You are not paying tax you shouldn't have to, you are paying too little tax and enabling a political system that deprives the majority of the population of benefits.
The majority of private school parents are business owners. Perhaps there should be extra scrutiny of their tax affairs to prove that they are contributing enough? After all, it would be a terrible indictment of the system if they were dodging tax to pay for private education wouldn't it?
I think it's pretty obvious that there is no benefit to the majority of the nation from the 6-7% of children who are educated at great cost outside of the state system. The idea that it is a relief to the system to have theese kids taken out and for their wealthier than average parents to feel justified in whinging about how much tax they pay is ridiculous.
Just face facts, if you can afford to pay for your kids to go to private school, you could afford to pay more tax. So the obvious solution is to tax private schools out of existence, tax rich people more, put that money into education, educate our nation better for the benefit of everyone.
It's not that difficult.
Dear oh dear. So much anger and so little logic. The majority of private school parents are business owners. Perhaps there should be extra scrutiny of their tax affairs to prove that they are contributing enough? After all, it would be a terrible indictment of the system if they were dodging tax to pay for private education wouldn't it?
I think it's pretty obvious that there is no benefit to the majority of the nation from the 6-7% of children who are educated at great cost outside of the state system. The idea that it is a relief to the system to have theese kids taken out and for their wealthier than average parents to feel justified in whinging about how much tax they pay is ridiculous.
Just face facts, if you can afford to pay for your kids to go to private school, you could afford to pay more tax. So the obvious solution is to tax private schools out of existence, tax rich people more, put that money into education, educate our nation better for the benefit of everyone.
It's not that difficult.
Private school parent here….never owned a business in my life. Earnt every penny the hard way. Went to a state school.
dimots said:
M1AGM said:
If thats not satire then you take the prize for the biggest chip. How do you know that most parents are business owners, and how would they be dodging taxes to pay school fees? And how do you know the disposable incomes of everyone? Remarkable prejudice. Are you Angela?
Old stats, but here you go:https://www.pepf.co.uk/fact-finder/facts-and-figur...
The large majority (around 87%) of pupils at private schools come from parents who are business owners, or have professional and managerial backgrounds. The proportions have not changed much for a long time.
The below table shows the proportions of pupils according to family background.
FAMILY BACKGROUND 2004 2014
Managerial & professional 77% 78%
Intermediate occupations 5% 6%
Small Employers 7% 9%
Routine and manual occupations 6% 4%
Not working/unknown 5% 3%
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff