To think private schools should be banned?

[BethanyBoobs]

Why should someone have a better education just because their parents have money? Why should someone have a better chance of getting into university because their parents paid for their education? It makes me feel uncomfortable that people can buy their kids an upper hand when it comes to education.

I feel the same way about private health care too.

IMO private schools should be banned. Everyone should have the same chances when it comes to their education.

[Primafacie]

Some children are born pretty
Some will be taller than others
Some are born into money
Some are brighter than others
Some live in nicer areas
Some can sing
Some are better at sports

What is your point, OP?

If you remove one source of 'unfairness', the other ones remain. Life isn't fair, it cannot be made to be fair.

BTW, gay parents AND teachers at our (selective indie) prep. :) no one gives a shit.

[jonicomelately]

The gay comments are just as ridiculous OP frankly.

[DamnBamboo]

(Bob crow's post above)

[RaRaTheNoisyLion]

'The majority of parents who send children to private schools are higher rate taxpayers so are already paying a fair share of the country's tax burden.'

Well that isn't actually true is it. Proportionally and all that.

[ComradePlexiglass]

ComradeBobCrow was clearly being tongue in cheek/ironic.

"Filthy Lucre" was also a tongue in cheek phrase, comradejonicomelately and you completely missed the point of my post. The point was that IF the NHS and state education were good enough then private systems would not be in such demand. I did not claim that the NHS and state education were in fact good enough. I do not believe that they are good enough much of the time. I think it was rather harsh of you to tell me to fuck off.

[BillyBanter]

run a cake stall! Just whatever you don't attack the structures that keep the rich rich and the poor poor. The rich don't like that.

[RaRaTheNoisyLion]

Yes they should pay more tax, and fund better state schools regardless of where they send their own darlinks!

[RaRaTheNoisyLion]

'If they have charitable status they don't have to pay tax on any profits,'

That's the same thing as getting a wad of money.

If I didn't have to pay tax on anything, I'd be significantly richer, and the tax man would be poorer. no?

[DamnBamboo]

It is true Rara.

Something like the top 10% of earners, pay over 75% of the income tax collected by the treasury.

They are paying more, way way more proportionally than lower earners.

Nobody has addressed the issue of state school spaces. Where will the money for that come from? Who the heck is going to pay for it?

[BethanyBoobs]

The gay comments are just as ridiculous OP frankly.

I wish I could find a way to tell my "D"sister this.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure that I've made it clear throughout the thread that it's not me who holds these views.

[DamnBamboo]

Yes they should pay more tax, and fund better state schools regardless of where they send their own darlinks!

They do pay more tax!

Why are you confused by this?

[Quinteszilla]

I would like to know how much profits private schools actually make.

[RaRaTheNoisyLion]

Proportional to THEMSELVES not the damn overall tax budget.

[NancyJones]

But surely the biggest gap isn't between private and state but between state in area A and state in area B?
Where we used to live, you couldn't buy a house in our state primary catchment for less than 500k! The demographics of the school were no different from those at the local prep. The kids at the state school still had all the extras just in evenings and weekends. They still did horse riding, rugby, ballet etc. They still went skiing. Their lives and education was very similar to the children at the prep. But their lives were vastly removed from that of the kids in a primary 6miles away.

The real advantage isn't so much the private education but everything else that affluence affords these children. The experiences, the holidays, the input from (very often) educated, interested parents. The outcome for children with all these who just happen to be state educated if very similar.

[RaRaTheNoisyLion]

It aint about profit because presumably that is further invested in stables or whatever....... wot gets paid for with taxpayers money, or money that should have been used for funding state education.

[jonicomelately]

The point is Plexiglass that people aren't buying an advantage with their money, whether health or education. They're being forced into a position where they have to spend money. Only a mad person would waste their money if the service was available for free. I think that's the point you were trying to make but given how crippling the cost has been to my family just in order for DP being able to function, I find your tongue in cheek comments annoying.

[Quinteszilla]

Proportionally, "to themselves", paying 40% or 45% tax, is quite a substantial amount of money.

[DamnBamboo]

so you think a 'soak the rich' policy is the way forward?

[jonicomelately]

Op. If your sister seriously holds these views she'll soon find herself ostracised for being an idiot, whether her DC go to a state school or private.

[Quinteszilla]

Or the profit is spent on bursaries and scholarships, perhaps.

[RaRaTheNoisyLion]

Someone in the top 10% does not pay more tax proportionally to someone in the bottom 10% when you look at the percentage of earnings that becomes disposable income, or indeed the absolute amount.

[BobCrow]

Yeah RaRa let's make everyone who earns over the national average income pay 75% tax! The majority of private schools will then close down as few will be able to afford the fees and you and Bethany will get your wish. However, please don't be so niave as to think those parents will then spend their energies improving failing state schools. Much more likely that they will look for other ways to improve their children's education.

[RaRaTheNoisyLion]

The don't pay 40% on the whole lot though, and mostly in the top bracket they can afford accountants to reduce even that.

[Caitlin17]

OP-This is your post in your words- no mention of your sister
*BethanyBoobs Mon 31-Mar-14 22:54:27
I don't know. I just find it sad that private schools are allowed to discriminate with things.

For instance, would a selective private school (or any private school for that matter) admit a student if they were a child of a gay couple for instance? Probably not. I don't think they're covered by the same discriminatory laws as state schools. Unfair for everyone.

Likewise would people with disabilities and learning disabilities be admitted to private school? Highly unlikely.

[Caitlin17]

Oh and they are covered by the same rules.