High earners should be charged for state schools!

[RawCoconutMacaroon]

BBC report this morning carries the suggestion from Dr Anthony Seldon, head of the private Wellington College, that parents with a family income of £80k should pay for state school places.

WTAF? Kind of ignoring the fact that it is ONLY people on fairly high incomes who actually pay enough tax to cover the cost of their child/children's state school place (roughly £4500 per year per child). Yes of course tax is collected according to an ability to pay and then distributed so all benefit from "free" education, which is right and proper...

BUT he thinks people who are already paying a lot in tax should effectively be penalised and charged again for their child's place at state school! Although maybe he's coming from the POV that if high income parents have to pay for state school, they will be more likely to pay out for their child to go to his private school.

Yikes lots of ranty crap typing there, sorry ^

I was gobsmacked at the sheer stupidity of this idea. The entitlement to free state education is something that was fought hard for in the past and should be a fundamental right for all children.
Even if you earn £200k gross, after tax, that is about 1/2 to £100k. If you then have say 3 kids, that's 60k more, so you would be left with about 20% of your income once the state had taken its first cut. That excludes mortgage, council tax etc. So what would be the point of striving and earning?
As someone else said, it's also the thin end of the wedge. Why not make high earners pay the full cost of NHS treatment?
So you get people paying in large sums in tax who are getting very little back. Not only is that pretty unfair and undemocratic, it is a massive disincentive to society to deliver economic growth.
If the better off then opted for private education, state schools would potentially become the place where only the "lower classes" attend, creating exactly the opposite from what Seldon declares he wants.
Fact is that because parents want the best for their children, whatever you do someone will find a way of improving their chances of getting in to the best schools. Short of refusing to let people on certain income levels buy near good schools what can you do?The answer is to improve education for everybody not try and limit it to those designated as worthy.

Whew! feel better now I've got that off my chest.

I can see where he's coming from, in terms of the problem identified. Unfortunately the solution he proposes is ignorant and antagonistic at best and plain stupid at worst.

The rather more obvious solution to the 'rich people' paying to live near good schools, paying for tutoring etc, is to a) improve the less good schools, thus narrowing the gap and b) reviewing the admissions criteria.

At the moment if it's done on distance, then obviously the houses closest will be more in demand and push up prices. If, on the other hand, it was done as a lottery system within a set catchment distance, with medical/siblings etc having priority as currently, then it would be a fairer system. Of course there are flaws with the concept, as with all, but it's still a lot better than trying to suggest parents pay twice for a state education - which will end up either with a two-tier state system as suggested, or more significant social/economic problems as one parent, probably the mother, drops out of work so the family income is back under the threshold. Many two-working-parent families are already either making a loss or just breaking even on salaries after tax, commuting and wrap-around childcare; to be penalised further for working would probably be the final straw.

Fucking stupid man though - he's either trying to be controversial for his own PR or he genuinely shouldn't be responsible for anyone's education.

Well, they've already done this for child benefit at a much lower income level. It was only a matter of time before they do the same for schooling, health, etc. I am just amazed that they haven't suggested the cut off as any family with one higher rate tax payer. After all, they were happy with that as a threshold to remove family allowance.

Wouldn't anybody with 80k be paying private fees anyway, stupid man.

Not forgetting the hideously huge marginal tax rate a family with 3 kids in state education earning 80k would face. You'd just reduce your income to go below the threshold.

Isn't this typical of what a conservative government stands for though.
People laugh at me when I suggest that they manipulate society into becoming their ideal Nuclear family consisting of a sahp, both parents married and now trying to get as many people as they can out of state education.
The new laws on not being able to take dc out of schools for holidays, and now this about paying for education. I suppose its one way of tackling over subscription in schools.

Why are peoples calling him "stupid"? He is the headmaster of a private school and he is suggesting a policy that would benefit his business and the rest of the private school sector.

Err no morethan. We are effectively ca single income family of 5. Our income is approx 70k. No way could we afford a private education for our dc. With a mortgage of 1, 000 on a small 4 bed and high commuting costs 70k isn't as massive as it seems.
Private ecucation even fur 2dc would be something like 10 to 15k per year I would imagine. Not going to happen.

Good idea re lottery within catchment Wingdingdong. I think that would be far fairer. It would have to be the same in all boroughs/areas though or people would keep relocating!

Alife, would it not cause huge problems with traffic though? Our local primary has an outstanding offstead report. Most of the children walk to school as it's their closest school. If they were allocated a school 3 miles away it would cause massive congestion in the mornings. Also, if you don't drive you're screwed. There would be no sense of community either as the local children wouldn't know each other, as all the children would be at different schools.

highho

I know its not a huge amount if you have high mortgages and commute but if this did happen surely it would mean that richer families would opt for private. If you have to pay anyway you would go private irrespective of what you earned. I'm sure both state and private would end up charging the same.

I think the prices of private schools would go up so some people won't have a choice but to stick to mediocre state schools and still pay for the "privilege".

"Isn't this typical of what a conservative government stands for though."

Possibly. But as the report author is associated with Labour, I'd watch out for this one coming from the Left as part of the "broadest shoulders bearing more of the burden" agenda.

Private ecucation even fur 2dc would be something like 10 to 15k per year I would imagine. Not going to happen.

It would usually about 9 to 10k outside London. Surely a family on 80k could afford that if they really had to, particularly those in which only one person works (i.e. the non working person could get a job, live in a cheaper house etc)?

Erm, why the people that contribute the most should be forced to get a smaller house or not afford being a SAHM ? How about jobless people looking for jobs first and paying their share of taxes instead of squeezing the middle even more?

DD's prep costs around £15k per annum and is well outside London. I think that is fairly typical for those in the south-east

Okay outside London and the Southeast they are usually about 9 to 10k.

Erm, why the people that contribute the most should be forced to get a smaller house or not afford being a SAHM ? How about jobless people looking for jobs first and paying their share of taxes instead of squeezing the middle even more?

Noone has said they should (apart from the headmaster of a private school). People are just speculating on what would happen is such as policy was in place.

I think in that case DH will give up job, we'll get a massive house to get rid of savings and then claim benefits for a family of 5. Problem solved!

Typical mn response. If you have a high income and the govt is considering screwing y
Ou over again. You zre told get a job, move house etc.

Tablet strikes again.

Local independent charges between 8k and 11k per child btw. Just checked.

Typical mn response. If you have a high income and the govt is considering screwing y
Ou over again. You zre told get a job, move house etc.

Nobody is saying you should do anything.