to think it's a bit cheeky for the wealthy to monopolise places in the top state schools instead of coughing up for private?

[rainbowtoenails]

I've read a lot of the education threads on here and lots of people seem to despair that they can't get into their local state school unless they live within a few feet, where the house prices spike up by several thousands of pounds.
I agree but I'm going to take the arguement one step further by saying that I think its wrong for someone who can easily afford it, to forgo private schools, and take up places at the most oversubscribed state schools, often by using their money to inflate local house prices.
I know that these people have paid their taxes for the state schools but we all pay tax for services we dont use.
If everyone who could afford it went private there would be a lot more spaces in the top state schools for pupils from a wide variety of backgrounds. I firmly beleive that the top state schools should not only serve the rich. This perverse system means that lower income families are paying tax to provide an education they themselves have no access to.

TalkinPeace I personally know of 6 families who have left the UK in the last 6 months to do the same job elsewhere. Where I lived in London there were small businesses going bust because their client base was leaving.

It is important to pay attention to what the rats are doing when you are on a ship.

We are complete mercenaries, but mercenaries pay tax and buy things.

As I said, if this was to happen in Oz, I would simply stop paying for the schools altogether. This sort of move would be a disaster for state education.

It would widen the gap between rich and poor so profoundly that I think it would result in a completely different sort of country.

It is no skin off my nose or my kid's, we can afford private schooling comfortably, but it would seriously fuck up a bunch of people if all of the extra money that rich people can put into a state school suddenly vanished along with the drop in tax people would be willing to pay.

I don't mind paying tax at all, I love that I live in a country where everyone gets access to schools, hospitals, police etc. You take away my right to access those things and I will find a way to not pay for them.

The sort of division and resentment this sort of move would bring should scare people.

OP - just seen that you think health care is totally different. Why? It's exactly the same principle.

Also, your idea that £15.5k is "enough to live on" is a little naive. You have no idea of people's personal circumstances.

And it's worth adding that people on an income of £15,500 would probably get that topped up with tax credits etc to which the people on £40k would not be entitled!

Education is like anything else: the richer you are, the more choice of better products you will have.

Motto: be rich!

Moroth if you are in Australia you know all about the Medicare levy and the private school refund, I don't see all the big hitters from Australia jumping ship.

Rainbow - sorry, ducked off the thread last night to do other stuff.

I made the comment I made because I simply don't recognise the scenario you're talking about, although I'm sure it does happen in some places. Our local (village) school is representative of the whole community - from those living in council houses to those who could certainly afford to go private if they wanted to. And if you live in one of the catchment villages you are pretty much guaranteed a space. It's a good school - not 'outstanding' (whatever that means!) but good, friendly, inclusive, strong teaching etc. I can't believe I'm the only person in the country who has that experience of primary education?!

No, Bramshott, you're not, and well said!

I am so sick of this idea that either you
a) send your kids to a crap school that you hate and are therefore envious of private schools
or
b) buy a house which is insanely expensive to go to a 'leafy comp'.

Most people just send their kids to school, and it's fine.

If they do send their kids to private school they're immediately branded elitist and every achievement the child makes is not due to their hard work and intelligence but that they went to a "posh" school.

You just have to look at the bitter griping that goes on over the amount of people in government whose parents took that choice and had that opportunity. Lots of people have a major chip on their shoulder about it.

If they do send their kids to private school they're immediately branded elitist and every achievement the child makes is not due to their hard work and intelligence but that they went to a "posh" school.

You just have to look at the bitter griping that goes on over the amount of people in government whose parents took that choice and had that opportunity. Lots of people have a major chip on their shoulder about it.

Ha Ha - too funny.

I tell you what rainbowtoenails I'll review your family's income and suggest which supermarket you should be shopping in and which price range you should be paying for your children's clothing.

I'll also check that you buy British and fairtrade/organic products regardless of the additonal cost if I deem that you can afford it.

Once a year I'll review things and at the same time dictate that if you can afford a holiday then you must take one.

Wouldn't you think it was wrong of me to imply you were being cheeky by not spending your disposable income (after all taxes have been paid) given that the economic situation is dire and people are losing their jobs all over the country at present. If people with plenty of disposable income don't keep spending then things will be dire for manufacturing staff/shop assistants etc.

Private schooling is a luxury item - people cannot be criticised for opting out of luxury items when there is a perfectly good cheaper option available with which they are content.

Also as someone who can't afford private school fees unless it became absolutely necessary for some reason or other (say at secondary level if things were going a bit awry for my dc in state schools) I'd rather some of those middle class professionals, who could possibly afford to send their children elsewhere, didn't mind leaving them in the state system so that the cross section of society is more closely reflected by the mix of pupils in the state system and thereby benefitting my state educated children.

Hopefully you will use MN as an educational tool to learn more about society/economics etc before putting forward any more naive theories, particularly in AIBU

OP, you are talking shite.
Dumbest idea I've seen on here for a while.

I have three kids, are you actually saying that my husband and I should pay a minimum of 12k per term for our children's education (and that really is a bare minimum) simply because we are middle earners?

If you earn 75k a year, the take home is 50k. So you expect that we should pay 36k of that remaining 50k on school fees? Leaving 14 per year for absolutely everything else (mortgage/council tax/bills/food/clothes/insurance etc..)

You seem not to have the best grasp of basic economics!

chicletteeth i've just written exactly the same post as you...

we have 3 kids, household income is 75k, and we are just about to move to an area with decent state schools as although ds1 is currently at private school, there is simply no way we can afford to put all 3dc through at 10k pa for primary and £15k pa secondary

Mrsravelstein some people just don't get it, do they.

We'd be flat broke and incurring debt if we put our boys into private school; and it wouldn't even necessarily be a good one.

YABU and your argument is cock-eyed. Many wealthier people support things like the state school system and the NHS on principle, for political reasons. Because they believe in the socialist principles of these services being paid for by all and accessible for all. Because as soon as you take all the wealthier and more influential people out of the state system, and they have no vested interest in keeping it good, it worsens. Sad state of affairs but that's how it goes.

if you want a two-tier system with great schools for the wealthy and a basic level for everyone else then your idea is the way forward. We already have this system a little (look at the % of people from private schools in top jobs compared to others) but your plan would exacerbate this and lead to a society where your place is even more fixed at birth than it is at the moment.

What you should be arguing if you really want things to be better is for private schooling to be abolished and everyone to be allocated a school by lottery. Then you might see some interesting improvements in the state system

NOTE I am not advocating this course of action, simply pointing out that it is as extreme as the OPs suggestion and might have more of the result that she's looking for.

bramshott- there is nothing wrong with people going to a local mixed school like the one you describe but how would you feel if lots of very wealthy people swarmed in and bought up all the local houses so that you couldn't get a place and had to ship your child off to a school miles away because those who can choose to manipulate the system.

I have never said on this thread that state education should be means tested but I think that the loopholes, which allow people to move into catchment areas and create state schools which only serve the wealthy, should be closed. Is that really so bad?

It's a terrible suggestion rainbowtoenails. Why are you trying to limit people's choices over their children's education on the basis of a person's bank balance

I think that the wealthy should be encouraged to go to state schools and mix with the rest of us. I'm sure Windsor Community College (or whatever) would have been a better school had Prince William gone there rather than to Eton.

....trying to imagine this swarm of rich people coming and buying my house off me, willy nilly.

It's not happening for me, I'm afraid,

I just don't think it would / could happen - there's only a limited number of houses, and unless someone could physically move the council houses with a large crane, it just wouldn't be possible for the scenario you describe to happen here.

I appreciate that in large urban centres this can and does happen, and it is frustrating, but you are making out as though this happens across the country, when actually it's a specific, urban issue I think. Not everyone lives in London / a large city you know!

Op you do realise that not all the wealthy people living within good catchment areas are actually there because of the school, some bought their house there simply because they liked the house, some dont even have kids.

What is your definition of poor ? Im assuming, pls correct me, those on benefit ? Are we talking about any particular type of benefit here ?

What happens if joe is on unemployment benefit, moves near good school
But then gets a fantastic job and is earning loads...(because peoples fortunes do change) are his children supposed to be kicked out of their school and now forced to go private ?

Again what is your idea of wealthy ? The houses by the good state school my ds goes to at the moment cost about four to five hundred, i dont consider this wealthy, the few families that i know are pretty ordinary, one couple are both police officers, another couple, dad sells cars mums a secretary, another, mum's a nurse dads a mechanic.

Eager as I am to waste time away from my writing (which is going badly!) I really cannot get myself worked up about this question. It would require a level of interest in other people's lives (and bank statements) that I am simply not capable of. Though I suppose I may be influenced by the fact that there are no Outstanding state schools locally.

If you live in a half million pound house then yes I do consider that wealthy, either you must have very high salaries to afford a mortgage of that size or you must have 100s of thousands in equity.

Some people are manipulating the state system by moving specifically to get into a school's catchment. This then excludes low and middle income families from these schools. They pay their taxes and deserve equal access.

Some people manipulate the system by getting religion when their children are small.

Do you have any plans for them?

I think if a system is faulty you need to change the system. Blaming individuals for putting their children above their principles - it's all well and good but it isn't actually going to get you very far.