Kier starmer! He hates strivers!

[Bucketheadbucketbum]

He wants to introduce a policy to put up the cost of school fees 10 to 15%. This is a tax on hard-working parents! We slave away cutting cots everywhere living hand to mouth to try and improve our childrens future . Live in an average house average area 1 shit car no holidays work like a dog to get our kids through. We are easing the burden on the state system by choosing independent schools. We're not sending them to Eton paid by our trust fund! Why does he want to punish strivers! Tax the energy companies! So disappointed. We need a new political party. What's the point in trying to better your future.

For primary, we pay mainly for logistical reasons - proximity, after school clubs, etc.

For secondary, we are in a decent catchment but we also have an excellent private school near us which we prefer on the margin. However that “margin” changes if the VAT is considered.

Again, not complaining or asking for sympathy. Just wanted to share another POV, that people who can afford the increases might simply not want to pay them.

Democracy isn't about 10 wolves and 1 chicken voting to decide what's going to be for dinner.

I doubt that precisely 92% of the population would be supportive.

Why didn’t you quote the person who said it.. there are other posters

But no I didn’t take the meaning as same people but can’t guess for them.

I'm not suggesting 92% will but I imagine at least 50% will.

I agree with you. It’ll garner attention but hopefully won’t happen anyway.

Can't be bothered to read the whole thread but private school like private medicine or private anything similar is a luxury and should be taxed.

Alternatively abolish it totally and let all kids sink or swim in the same state school pond. Then you'd be 'striving' to work your ass off for the benefit of your local comp which would benefit all students not just those whose parents can afford buy privilege.

Polling shows 90% oppose current arrangements, split between forcing private schools to do far more to justify charitable status Vs removing the tax break.

This policy has very few opponents, for obvious reasons.

How much would the government raise if private schools weren't allowed charitable status? What sort of sim are we talking about, I'm not sure I've ever seen these figures

It is an asset you’re right. It’ll be used for a petty policy that people will vote for for emotional reasons (that’s the Brexit part) but won’t bring much and could even hurt what we do well.

People will rejoice, we’ll lose out overall thought. But pp with u-turn probably has it right. It’s a prod and not much more.

This is not about the money, it's about fairness.

The stated figure is £1.7 billion (annual).

The ISC figures on resultant closures are not robust.

If you want to understand why we still have a class system in this country, the main reason is private schools.

@Bucketheadbucketbum in none of your posts you addressed the fact that these schools are businesses and should be taxed accordingly. You only accuse other posters of vitriol and Keir Starmer of being anti aspiration in, frankly, childish language (he hates this! He hates that!) and with nothing but a tired slogan to explain your point of view (politics of envy). Governments and parties need to think about a whole country, not just what affects you personally, Bucket.

I wouldn’t have thought it’ll make that much difference to fees anyway. If you look at how school fees change in relation to their actual costs/ inflation it’s very clear that they charge what the local market will bear. The difference in fees between SW London (my area) and further North is well beyond the difference in what they’re paying teachers it’s just that they can fill the school charging £27k a year so why wouldn’t they?

Because they are hugely profitable businesses and offer elite experiences. Many of the Public schools in U.K. provide schools abroad as part of their ‘family’. They generate significant income, reduce percentages of international students in the ‘home’ school (so keeping it more attractive to U.K. parents), offer opportunities for work experience, volunteering and language immersion to U.K. and overseas students, widens recruitment pool for staff and career opportunities for staff.

But mainly it’s about generation of income. Not unreasonably. They are businesses after all and the Chinese market is huge.

@MarshaBradyo You are both in the quote. If you aren't actually in agreement with it or didn't "take the meaning as same people" then may be don't quote a post and reply "yep" to it.

Did she use the words ‘the same people’?

Or ‘People never think things through to the end conclusion’

It’s the actual words I said yep too. So no I don’t change my response:

I can pretty much guarantee that if all the independent schools in the area lost their charitable status and ceased their "charity work", the 92%+ of local children who go to state schools, would not notice the "loss" of charitable work that all these independent schools are supposedly doing.

And the local authority is certainly not thinking, "ooh you know what's really having a noticeable impact on local educational outcomes (or pretty much any positive impact on anything other outcome either), it's all the charitable work done by all the independent schools in the area."

The purpose of a charity is public benefit.
However, the public benefit of these schools' charitable status seems pretty limited.

No, we just want them taxed as the business they are.

The quotes, "take the meaning as same people" are your exact words.

Oh god go away. Honestly why quote this?

I agreed with a poster that ‘People never think things through to the end conclusion.’

Get over it.

@MarshaBradyo Erm, if you look back, you yourself said "the same people".
Anyway, this is futile, so I'm not going to continue with this side-bar.

The reason Blair never pursued this is he went to Fettes. A hypocrisy too far.

Anyway, private schools are places of great privilege, tax them, it's been many years coming. I went to a private school and heard all these arguments from the children who were convinced that because their parents paid tax and fees that they were better people. The snobbery was off the charts.

Paying for privilege is one thing, claiming you are humble or removing a burden on state services quite another. A particularly English disease to claim being privileged and relatively wealthy is deserving of a tax break as a charity.

Tf for that.

@Orangepolentacake

👏

OP opens with an incendiary post, and then complains when folks take issue with it 😂