Private schools, times a changing?

[cheesejunkie]

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.

Labour aren’t in power.

The decision of the tories to enact austerity was political opinions over economic sense, I’m guessing it didn’t bother you as much as hypothetical situations that haven’t happened yet.

Edited by cheesejunkie on Monday 22 April 21:06

[cheesejunkie]

Wombat3 said:

As I have said before while you would not design the system the way it is from scratch, but we are where we are

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 fkwittery.

I’ll agree to disagree. I don’t think adding VAT is economic vandalism but I respect your viewpoint.

Economic vandalism is allowing some to ignore others’ problems whilst taking their dollar.

I’d love to believe that standards could be raised by having state schools emulate private ones, I’m unfortunately gifted with enough intelligence to know that’s a daft notion.

We can agree on the uselessness of governance and governments. I think the policy pitch is blunt but not incorrect.

I have no time for people who call it a punishment policy if they’re the same ones who support pretty much any Tory penalising social policy you care to mention over the last fifteen years.

[Wombat3]

cheesejunkie said:

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.

La our aren’t in power.

The decision of the tories to enact austerity was political opinions over economic sense, I’m guessing it didn’t bother you as much as hypocritical situations that haven’t happened yet.

Convenient memory there. The Tories inherited an economy on its knees and a baked in structural deficit of well over £100bn p.a. yet still public spending went up YoY.

Reductions in public spending were not really optional.

That's what happens when you have to fix Labour's unaffordable largesse.

[cheesejunkie]

Wombat3 said:

Convenient memory there. The Tories inherited an economy on its knees and a baked in structural deficit of well over £100bn p.a. yet still public spending went up YoY.

Reductions in public spending were not really optional.

That's what happens when you have to fix Labour's unaffordable largesse.

The tories made it worse.

[cheesejunkie]

Sorry that was flippant, but you made me laugh.

Reductions in public spending were entirely optional and austerity is recognised by all but a few zealots t be a failed policy decision that’s partially responsible for the UK’s lack f growth to this day.

Punishing those least able to afford it was the actions of a , no two ways about that.

[Wombat3]

cheesejunkie said:

Sorry that was flippant, but you made me laugh.

Reductions in public spending were entirely optional and austerity is recognised by all but a few zealots t be a failed policy decision that’s partially responsible for the UK’s lack f growth to this day.

Punishing those least able to afford it was the actions of a , no two ways about that.

I'm always amused by that line of thinking when it comes from the same side of the aisle that berated Truss for unfunded spending causing the markets to puke.

[ooid]

cheesejunkie said:

I'll argue that all day long because I'm a righteous muther fker.

speaking of delusions of grandeur...

[cheesejunkie]

ooid said:

speaking of delusions of grandeur...

Always. Don’t tell me you don’t.

[cheesejunkie]

Wombat3 said:

I'm always amused by that line of thinking when it comes from the same side of the aisle that berated Truss for unfunded spending causing the markets to puke.

Truss explicitly chose to ignore all advice bar tufton and sacked her main adviser. Then blamed the establishment for not advising her. Kwasi was not an idiot and knew what they were doing. Own the fkup and don’t blame others.

[NomduJour]

cheesejunkie said:

Truss explicitly chose to ignore all advice bar tufton and sacked her main adviser. Then blamed the establishment for not advising her. Kwasi was not an idiot and knew what they were doing. Own the fkup and don’t blame others

There was a short-term rise in bond yields and interest rates - if the mini-budget hadn’t existed, things would very likely still be exactly as they are now.

[cheesejunkie]

NomduJour said:

There was a short-term rise in bond yields and interest rates - if the mini-budget hadn’t existed, things would very likely still be exactly as they are now.

Apart from her choosing hunt and facng the humiliation of every one of her policys being reversed.

I don’t think she had everything wrong, I do think she’s a useless politician.

Obviously my politics lean differently but that doesn’t mean I assume the other side are fools. But she made it easy to do so and continues to.

[Wombat3]

cheesejunkie said:

Wombat3 said:

I'm always amused by that line of thinking when it comes from the same side of the aisle that berated Truss for unfunded spending causing the markets to puke.

Truss explicitly chose to ignore all advice bar tufton and sacked her main adviser. Then blamed the establishment for not advising her. Kwasi was not an idiot and knew what they were doing. Own the fkup and don’t blame others.

It's back to the principle of affordable vs unaffordable spending. Back in 2010 we were properly on the rack & committed to massive spending thanks again to G Brown. Something had to give. If they had tried to carry on spending at the same rate fk knows what would have happened.

Anyway this is OT

[Zaichik]

cheesejunkie said:

austerity is recognised by all but a few zealots t be a failed policy decision

actually the opposite is true and demonstrated by every country that decides to spend more than it can tax/produce. borrowing and/or taxing your way to some kind of prosperity once you are already in the red is a failed policy decision - you have to control spending and provide incentives to the productive part of the economy to grow and the productive part of the economy is not self indulgent public services.

[cheesejunkie]

Zaichik said:

actually the opposite is true and demonstrated by every country that decides to spend more than it can tax/produce. borrowing and/or taxing your way to some kind of prosperity once you are already in the red is a failed policy decision - you have to control spending and provide incentives to the productive part of the economy to grow and the productive part of the economy is not self indulgent public services.

Productive part of the economy. lol. Bean counters definitely aren’t.

I suppose I am that part. But I agree with wombat this is going OT.

Self indulgent public services. Jesus. I’m not anti Tory but that sort of spin makes it tempting and easy.

ETA, and just to add some of the least productive people in the economy are landlords. But they don’t like being thought of in that way. I’ll admit I’m annoyed at what I see as a rent taking few getting worked up about something I won’t lose sleep over when they come out with claims like self indulgence but don’t want to pay vat. You may as well leave me an open net with that comment but I’ll not stick the boot in.

Government spending is investing in the economy.

Edited by cheesejunkie on Tuesday 23 April 03:58

[Zaichik]

cheesejunkie said:

Government spending is investing in the economy.

Edited by cheesejunkie on Tuesday 23 April 03:58

it is only investment if the commitment of resources achieves later and greater benefits otherwise it is a cost that could have been used productively elsewhere

[turbobloke]

Zaichik said:

cheesejunkie said:

Government spending is investing in the economy.

Edited by cheesejunkie on Tuesday 23 April 03:58

it is only investment if the commitment of resources achieves later and greater benefits otherwise it is a cost that could have been used productively elsewhere

For a moment there with the post you replied to I thought that Gordon Brown had joined PH under an edam epithet. Sponking any taxpayer cash is public money invested and that's a public good! The point that investors can lose money is forgotten. That's bad.

Browny's acumen was revealed when he advertised our Gold Giveaway in advance, compounding the error of selling at the bottom. Misguided, short-sighted and assinine, like attacking independent schools.

[Wombat3]

turbobloke said:

Browny's acumen was revealed when he advertised our Gold Giveaway in advance, compounding the error of selling at the bottom. Misguided, short-sighted and assinine, like attacking independent schools.

Except that even Brown wasn't stupid enough to mess with the education system to that extent.

That Starmers lot are signals much that isn't good.

[cheesejunkie]

Zaichik said:

it is only investment if the commitment of resources achieves later and greater benefits otherwise it is a cost that could have been used productively elsewhere

Nope. How is not using it being productive? Where do you suggest it would be more productively used? Preserving two tier systems?

Brown's selling off of the gold is not so black and white. There were valid reasons for doing so. I'll agree the way it was handled was inept. I'm no Gordon Brown fan but his demonisation is undeserved when you look at the state of subsequent PMs.

Starmer is not some evil poacher out to ruin education. The melodrama of that implication is why I can't take some of you seriously.

[dimots]

The ultra-right-wing on Pistonheads would love to see state schools run as hollowed out workhouses so that tax avoidant Tories get a few quid off to spend on hugely inefficient private services. Money spent per child in private schools is triple that in State schools. That money benefits a tiny minority. That tiny minority are unduly represented in careers such as law and politics which serve to pretect and preserve the status quo. It's a complete sham of a system.

Although defending this state of apartheid is quite natural to those unwilling to confront their own internal bias and prejuice, there are a growing number of academics and politicians calling it out.

Professor Francis Green is a good starting poiint.

https://francisgreenspersonalwebpage.com/

[Wombat3]

dimots said:

The ultra-right-wing on Pistonheads would love to see state schools run as hollowed out workhouses so that tax avoidant Tories get a few quid off to spend on hugely inefficient private services. Money spent per child in private schools is triple that in State schools. That money benefits a tiny minority. That tiny minority are unduly represented in careers such as law and politics which serve to pretect and preserve the status quo. It's a complete sham of a system.

Although defending this state of apartheid is quite natural to those unwilling to confront their own internal bias and prejuice, there are a growing number of academics and politicians calling it out.

Professor Francis Green is a good starting poiint.

https://francisgreenspersonalwebpage.com/

Right on Comrade!

Such bullst.