Private schools, times a changing?
Discussion
The narrative that this is a 'tax break' is a false one. It is not. As has been said many times, VAT is not chargeable on all goods and services and has never been chargeable on education.
Labour like to claim that any money held by business and individuals is subject to tax and that, if it isn't taxed, that is a tax break that the state have generously granted. In reality, money belongs to the business or individual that earned it and taxation is confiscatory.
The introduction of VAT on school fees isn't closing a tax break; it is levying a new tax
Labour like to claim that any money held by business and individuals is subject to tax and that, if it isn't taxed, that is a tax break that the state have generously granted. In reality, money belongs to the business or individual that earned it and taxation is confiscatory.
The introduction of VAT on school fees isn't closing a tax break; it is levying a new tax
ClaphamGT3 said:
The narrative that this is a 'tax break' is a false one. It is not. As has been said many times, VAT is not chargeable on all goods and services and has never been chargeable on education.
Labour like to claim that any money held by business and individuals is subject to tax and that, if it isn't taxed, that is a tax break that the state have generously granted. In reality, money belongs to the business or individual that earned it and taxation is confiscatory.
The introduction of VAT on school fees isn't closing a tax break; it is levying a new tax
I haven't read every post as I was working today and have better things to do with my time but that's an opinion and not a fact.Labour like to claim that any money held by business and individuals is subject to tax and that, if it isn't taxed, that is a tax break that the state have generously granted. In reality, money belongs to the business or individual that earned it and taxation is confiscatory.
The introduction of VAT on school fees isn't closing a tax break; it is levying a new tax
VAT like any other tax is a choice made by governments, not just labour ones, the tories are quite fond of VAT and have a history of increasing it. I've mentioned I don't agree with VAT as I think it's regressive. But putting VAT on private education when VAT already is perfectly acceptable to those complaining about it doesn't bother me. I'll defend their corner if they complained about all VAT, I'll think they're two faced when they only complain about the VAT that hits their pocket harder.
cheesejunkie said:
I haven't read every post as I was working today and have better things to do with my time but that's an opinion and not a fact.
VAT like any other tax is a choice made by governments, not just labour ones, the tories are quite fond of VAT and have a history of increasing it. I've mentioned I don't agree with VAT as I think it's regressive. But putting VAT on private education when VAT already is perfectly acceptable to those complaining about it doesn't bother me. I'll defend their corner if they complained about all VAT, I'll think they're two faced when they only complain about the VAT that hits their pocket harder.
I don't doubt you have read every word VAT like any other tax is a choice made by governments, not just labour ones, the tories are quite fond of VAT and have a history of increasing it. I've mentioned I don't agree with VAT as I think it's regressive. But putting VAT on private education when VAT already is perfectly acceptable to those complaining about it doesn't bother me. I'll defend their corner if they complained about all VAT, I'll think they're two faced when they only complain about the VAT that hits their pocket harder.
Once again, all you are only interested in taxing toffs regardless of the actual consequences. You evidently could not care less for the actualities of the numbers who are there on a shoestring or a bursary; or indeed the effects on the wider education system that have been spelled out to you nine ways and backwards by actual people who .either have had previous experience or are currently engaged with the system. Even by someone who works right at the heart of the system and has detailed knowledge of the way it all works.
Your logic is flawed and non-sensical. Your understanding of the concepts of subsidy and taxation clearly somewhat impaired.
You claim to run your own business, if what we have seen here is the extent of your understanding of such things your accounts might make hilarious reading!
cheesejunkie said:
But putting VAT on private education when VAT already is perfectly acceptable to those complaining about it doesn't bother me. I'll defend their corner if they complained about all VAT, I'll think they're two faced when they only complain about the VAT that hits their pocket harder.
You're just making things up again. Where has anyone claimed VAT is great unless it's on school fees? Show me an example.I realise you're here to feel like you're winding up the gammons, which is rather pathetic in itself, but you're dreaming up motivations for most of the people you're arguing with because you're incapable of arguing coherently or in good faith.
EmBe said:
cheesejunkie said:
But putting VAT on private education when VAT already is perfectly acceptable to those complaining about it doesn't bother me. I'll defend their corner if they complained about all VAT, I'll think they're two faced when they only complain about the VAT that hits their pocket harder.
You're just making things up again. Where has anyone claimed VAT is great unless it's on school fees? Show me an example.I realise you're here to feel like you're winding up the gammons, which is rather pathetic in itself, but you're dreaming up motivations for most of the people you're arguing with because you're incapable of arguing coherently or in good faith.
He cannot/will not 'see' what he should, because it goes against what he feels the facts 'should say'.
This is the continual failure of socialism - we are not all equal and trying to make everyone equal is just plain wrong and a waste of time (and disadvantageous to society and humanity, too)
Wombat3 said:
I don't doubt you have read every word
Once again, all you are only interested in taxing toffs regardless of the actual consequences. You evidently could not care less for the actualities of the numbers who are there on a shoestring or a bursary; or indeed the effects on the wider education system that have been spelled out to you nine ways and backwards by actual people who .either have had previous experience or are currently engaged with the system. Even by someone who works right at the heart of the system and has detailed knowledge of the way it all works.
Your logic is flawed and non-sensical. Your understanding of the concepts of subsidy and taxation clearly somewhat impaired.
You claim to run your own business, if what we have seen here is the extent of your understanding of such things your accounts might make hilarious reading!
Lol. I don't do the accounts.Once again, all you are only interested in taxing toffs regardless of the actual consequences. You evidently could not care less for the actualities of the numbers who are there on a shoestring or a bursary; or indeed the effects on the wider education system that have been spelled out to you nine ways and backwards by actual people who .either have had previous experience or are currently engaged with the system. Even by someone who works right at the heart of the system and has detailed knowledge of the way it all works.
Your logic is flawed and non-sensical. Your understanding of the concepts of subsidy and taxation clearly somewhat impaired.
You claim to run your own business, if what we have seen here is the extent of your understanding of such things your accounts might make hilarious reading!
I'm good at what I do but there are things I shouldn't be trusted with.
No, I've no desire to punish toffs. I don't consider all these people toffs.
That sentence can be read two ways, I mean the polite version.
Honestly. From first principles. I have no problem with VAT being charged on private education if it's going to be charged on everything else. Not charging it on private education is a choice. One I disagree with. I'm not out to dip into your pocket, I'm strongly of the opinion that some have been dipping into mine by not paying VAT.
The consequences question is an interesting one. I'm willing to listen to some of the points and don't think they're all incorrect. (Every word before the but). But if some private schools are so close to the breadline that they'll go to the wall over this maybe the parents should pay a little more to support their privileges.
Really, I'm not all about screwing toffs. I am about toffs not screwing me.
dukeboy749r said:
We are all shouting at clouds if we keep responding to cheesejunkie.
He cannot/will not 'see' what he should, because it goes against what he feels the facts 'should say'.
This is the continual failure of socialism - we are not all equal and trying to make everyone equal is just plain wrong and a waste of time (and disadvantageous to society and humanity, too)
I'm not a socialist.He cannot/will not 'see' what he should, because it goes against what he feels the facts 'should say'.
This is the continual failure of socialism - we are not all equal and trying to make everyone equal is just plain wrong and a waste of time (and disadvantageous to society and humanity, too)
cheesejunkie said:
Wombat3 said:
I don't doubt you have read every word
Once again, all you are only interested in taxing toffs regardless of the actual consequences. You evidently could not care less for the actualities of the numbers who are there on a shoestring or a bursary; or indeed the effects on the wider education system that have been spelled out to you nine ways and backwards by actual people who .either have had previous experience or are currently engaged with the system. Even by someone who works right at the heart of the system and has detailed knowledge of the way it all works.
Your logic is flawed and non-sensical. Your understanding of the concepts of subsidy and taxation clearly somewhat impaired.
You claim to run your own business, if what we have seen here is the extent of your understanding of such things your accounts might make hilarious reading!
Lol. I don't do the accounts.Once again, all you are only interested in taxing toffs regardless of the actual consequences. You evidently could not care less for the actualities of the numbers who are there on a shoestring or a bursary; or indeed the effects on the wider education system that have been spelled out to you nine ways and backwards by actual people who .either have had previous experience or are currently engaged with the system. Even by someone who works right at the heart of the system and has detailed knowledge of the way it all works.
Your logic is flawed and non-sensical. Your understanding of the concepts of subsidy and taxation clearly somewhat impaired.
You claim to run your own business, if what we have seen here is the extent of your understanding of such things your accounts might make hilarious reading!
I'm good at what I do but there are things I shouldn't be trusted with.
No, I've no desire to punish toffs. I don't consider all these people toffs.
That sentence can be read two ways, I mean the polite version.
Honestly. From first principles. I have no problem with VAT being charged on private education if it's going to be charged on everything else. Not charging it on private education is a choice. One I disagree with. I'm not out to dip into your pocket, I'm strongly of the opinion that some have been dipping into mine by not paying VAT.
The consequences question is an interesting one. I'm willing to listen to some of the points and don't think they're all incorrect. (Every word before the but). But if some private schools are so close to the breadline that they'll go to the wall over this maybe the parents should pay a little more to support their privileges.
Really, I'm not all about screwing toffs. I am about toffs not screwing me.
However, if you price them out of it you might well find yourself paying for their state education instead.
As explained, I have no dog in the fight because I no longer have kids of school age. I can however see the obvious consequences and they are both wide and deep.
cheesejunkie said:
dukeboy749r said:
We are all shouting at clouds if we keep responding to cheesejunkie.
He cannot/will not 'see' what he should, because it goes against what he feels the facts 'should say'.
This is the continual failure of socialism - we are not all equal and trying to make everyone equal is just plain wrong and a waste of time (and disadvantageous to society and humanity, too)
I'm not a socialist.He cannot/will not 'see' what he should, because it goes against what he feels the facts 'should say'.
This is the continual failure of socialism - we are not all equal and trying to make everyone equal is just plain wrong and a waste of time (and disadvantageous to society and humanity, too)
cheesejunkie said:
Lol. I don't do the accounts.
I'm good at what I do but there are things I shouldn't be trusted with.
No, I've no desire to punish toffs. I don't consider all these people toffs.
That sentence can be read two ways, I mean the polite version.
Honestly. From first principles. I have no problem with VAT being charged on private education if it's going to be charged on everything else. Not charging it on private education is a choice. One I disagree with. I'm not out to dip into your pocket, I'm strongly of the opinion that some have been dipping into mine by not paying VAT.
The consequences question is an interesting one. I'm willing to listen to some of the points and don't think they're all incorrect. (Every word before the but). But if some private schools are so close to the breadline that they'll go to the wall over this maybe the parents should pay a little more to support their privileges.
Really, I'm not all about screwing toffs. I am about toffs not screwing me.
Try as I might I don't get your point about dipping into your pocket. Someone earlier posted about education and training showing its VAT expemt so Uni's, skills courses (plumbers etc), where I did my accountancy training (BPP). We could charge nurses VAT on their course fees too.I'm good at what I do but there are things I shouldn't be trusted with.
No, I've no desire to punish toffs. I don't consider all these people toffs.
That sentence can be read two ways, I mean the polite version.
Honestly. From first principles. I have no problem with VAT being charged on private education if it's going to be charged on everything else. Not charging it on private education is a choice. One I disagree with. I'm not out to dip into your pocket, I'm strongly of the opinion that some have been dipping into mine by not paying VAT.
The consequences question is an interesting one. I'm willing to listen to some of the points and don't think they're all incorrect. (Every word before the but). But if some private schools are so close to the breadline that they'll go to the wall over this maybe the parents should pay a little more to support their privileges.
Really, I'm not all about screwing toffs. I am about toffs not screwing me.
You are not loosing any money or paying more because the Tax does not exist on all training an education.
So we can make one type more expensive but it will have a negative impact as well as a money rasiing one. So some state schools will become more crowded and loose access to some facilities they had. Some children will have to leave a school they were happy at halfway though.
The upside is more money from the state but its only an upside if you can show how its spent and the benefit which no one seems to be able to do. As i pointed out earlier we pay tax to fund education for kids even if we dont have them. Education is a societal benefit, so private or state the UK and that includes you gets to live in a better educated society....why would you wish to damage that
EmBe said:
Then (and by your own admission) you're just here to keep having a go at strangers. Repeatedly.
Well when some of them have a go at me what do you expect?I've read many slurs aimed at me on this thread. I've allowed myself the odd insult but won't engage in a tit for tat.
So please f
k off with the false pretence of being scandalised.I'm not here to have a go at strangers. I have a difference of opinion. Some on here think that makes me a bad person. They're people who I refrain from saying what I really think about them as tempting as the alternative may be.
I know. Lots of sideways insults. f
k them.If you're prefer this thread to be full of people agreeing with each other then tough. It has long passed the point of advice on school fees and entered the territory of their suitability. Disagreeing is not a crime although I suspect a few on here would make it one.
philv said:
The decision by labour to put vat on private education is not an economic one.
It's one of political philosophy.
As such, it's wrong.
It won't affect the wealthy.
It will only affect those that can just about afford the fees.
How dare these people try and better themselves.
How are they bettering themselves?It's one of political philosophy.
As such, it's wrong.
It won't affect the wealthy.
It will only affect those that can just about afford the fees.
How dare these people try and better themselves.
philv said:
The decision by labour to put vat on private education is not an economic one.
It's one of political philosophy.
As such, it's wrong.
It won't affect the wealthy.
It will only affect those that can just about afford the fees.
How dare these people try and better themselves.
This.It's one of political philosophy.
As such, it's wrong.
It won't affect the wealthy.
It will only affect those that can just about afford the fees.
How dare these people try and better themselves.
There is no VAT on kids clothes or shoes. How popular would Labour be with parents across the board if that was done? At least I am not already paying for other people's kids shoes.
Wombat3 said:
As has been pointed out repeatedly, you are not supporting anyone's private education.
However, if you price them out of it you might well find yourself paying for their state education instead.
As explained, I have no dog in the fight because I no longer have kids of school age. I can however see the obvious consequences and they are both wide and deep.
If I end up paying for their state education instead I find that an acceptable compromise. However, if you price them out of it you might well find yourself paying for their state education instead.
As explained, I have no dog in the fight because I no longer have kids of school age. I can however see the obvious consequences and they are both wide and deep.
cheesejunkie said:
Wombat3 said:
As has been pointed out repeatedly, you are not supporting anyone's private education.
However, if you price them out of it you might well find yourself paying for their state education instead.
As explained, I have no dog in the fight because I no longer have kids of school age. I can however see the obvious consequences and they are both wide and deep.
If I end up paying for their state education instead I find that an acceptable compromise. However, if you price them out of it you might well find yourself paying for their state education instead.
As explained, I have no dog in the fight because I no longer have kids of school age. I can however see the obvious consequences and they are both wide and deep.
Got it.
Wombat3 said:
cheesejunkie said:
Wombat3 said:
As has been pointed out repeatedly, you are not supporting anyone's private education.
However, if you price them out of it you might well find yourself paying for their state education instead.
As explained, I have no dog in the fight because I no longer have kids of school age. I can however see the obvious consequences and they are both wide and deep.
If I end up paying for their state education instead I find that an acceptable compromise. However, if you price them out of it you might well find yourself paying for their state education instead.
As explained, I have no dog in the fight because I no longer have kids of school age. I can however see the obvious consequences and they are both wide and deep.
Got it.
FFS
Wombat3 said:
So in summary you propose that its a good idea to pay more tax whilst degrading the overall standard of education in the country whilst also putting some people out of work - and then disrupting the lives of a significant number of children.
Got it.
No but good call and made me think unlike some on here.Got it.
The overall standard of education is an interesting point. One I've mentioned on this thread. Should access be based on wealth? That's what I fundamentally disagree with. I also think one of the reasons why educational standards are failing in some areas is because some can choose to bypass. They're not supporting the education system by paying to bypass, they're failing it. I'll argue that all day long because I'm a righteous muther f
ker.I'm not really, but some on here need to realise they can't win with the arguments they're making.
I'm prepared to pay more tax for a consistent level of education. I'm not prepared to accept that being unwilling to accept VAT removal is helping anyone. If it puts some out of work, why? It won't disrupt the lives of any children, it'll annoy the parents. Please understand I'm not out to steal your breakfast, I am looking at your justification for how much you have on the plate.
cheesejunkie said:
Wombat3 said:
So in summary you propose that its a good idea to pay more tax whilst degrading the overall standard of education in the country whilst also putting some people out of work - and then disrupting the lives of a significant number of children.
Got it.
No but good call and made me think unlike some on here.Got it.
The overall standard of education is an interesting point. One I've mentioned on this thread. Should access be based on wealth? That's what I fundamentally disagree with. I also think one of the reasons why educational standards are failing in some areas is because some can choose to bypass. They're not supporting the education system by paying to bypass, they're failing it. I'll argue that all day long because I'm a righteous muther f
ker.I'm not really, but some on here need to realise they can't win with the arguments they're making.
I'm prepared to pay more tax for a consistent level of education. I'm not prepared to accept that being unwilling to accept VAT removal is helping anyone. If it puts some out of work, why? It won't disrupt the lives of any children, it'll annoy the parents. Please understand I'm not out to steal your breakfast, I am looking at your justification for how much you have on the plate.
Undeniably private schools are centres of excellence, that's why people are prepared to pay a lot of money for their kids to go to them,
If you want to raise standards overall then learn from them and try and emulate them. Destroying them as proposed is pretty much just ideological vandalism. Put them out of business by making them redundant/irrelevant if you want but destroying something that achieves high standards and results is pointless - especially when it costs you NOTHING.
As the man outlined above, they are not sitting there fat and happy on vast piles of cash either, its a pretty fragile system, and if you start to knock the dominoes over don't be surprised at how quickly and how many of them will fall.
As also explained, the ineptitude of the announcement of this policy will mean people (and schools) are already making decisions in preparation for this abject f
kwittery.Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff