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.

Wait... hold on... where's my teeny tiny violin? It must be here somewhere....

Ah! 🎻 there you go!

Move to a grammar area then, they haven't been abolished.

They should have had their charitable status taken away long ago .

OP, do you realise that grammar schools do nothing to reduce social inequality? The myth that they provide academic opportunities for bright working class children is just that - a myth.

It might help if you could explain why private schools should retain their charitable status.

Whichever politician or party it is, they always "just" need a bit more money to solve all your problems. Yet things keep getting worse and worse.

Maybe for the first time in hundreds of years we try having a smaller government. Just an idea. We don't seem to be able to afford the current set up.

If you're such a striver surely you can just get better jobs to afford the fee increases?

not quite sarcastic post

Surely its up to the school how the costs are passed on? Losing charitable status doesn't automatically mean fee increases.

I'd close all private schools too!

I moved my son into private school in the middle of year 2 as he was falling further and further behind and the school were essentially ignoring the problem. He is over a year behind his peers. If we kept him in the state sector, he would have slipped even further. He is thriving in his smaller classroom. Still behind but catching up.

We could probably absorb an increase in fees but I think very short sighted policy and only doing it for popularity . He knows labour supporters will like it just because it looks like it is targeted at wealthy people.

Not sure that private schools fully paying their way and not having VAT loopholes counts as vitriol.

Why on earth should others suggest how you spend your money? No-one owes you solution to your first world problem.

I'd be really interested to understand how big a sacrifice this is. What is your current household income (Gross not net) please?

OP you will be fine. We send our children private and can barely afford it but the state schools close to us (where we have any chance of getting in) are awful.

If this goes through, we will send our children to state school and put the money towards tutoring instead. I think significant targeted help in the key topics will work quite well.

I feel a bit sorry for the children on bursaries in our school (we have a few on full bursaries), but it is bad times for everyone. They are bright, they will cope everywhere.

I run a counselling practice and we are taxed as a business. Independent schools make their revenue the same way we do, from fees paid by the people who use our services, or their families. They’re businesses, not charities, and should be taxed as such. It’s profoundly irritating as a small business owner and “striver” to see businesses masquerading as charities when they aren’t, to the benefit those who have the most in society. YABU.

I couldn't afford private school but I see your point that the policy will be incredibly disruptive if it effectively prices children out of the school they're in. Independents reduce the burden on the state system, I'd let them keep their tax relief.

You sound anti-aspiration. Just aspire to earn more.

Private schools make a fortune and have been benefitting from tax loopholes for ages. If you can't afford their huge fees they're not meant for you - many are more of a business with large profits

There should not be any private schools. If all those rich children and parents were in the state system, the standards of state schools would rise overall.
Private schools exist to give a boost up to rich people’s kids.
They are in no way a charity. They are a business for the rich.
And, yes, you are rich if you can afford to send your kid to private school, even if you “scrimp and save” you are still rich if you have that sort of money to spare. People can’t afford to put their bloody heating on at the moment, let alone send their kids private.

Is this the headline for tomorrow’s DM? It seems to be increasingly hysterical so I imagine so

1. Why are so many Tory voters so utterly thick?

1. If the Tories are so brilliant then why are you worried about a policy that can't even be enacted by Starmer as it stands?

If you can’t afford a 10% rise in fees, it was a bit foolish sending your child to private school really.

Did you really think the fees would stay static for 14 years? They go up annually, usually by around 5%. So you’d presumably need to pull your kids out soon anyway.

You know statistically children in areas with comprehensive education tend to fare better overall than those in grammar areas?
You know grammars don’t improve social mobility?
You know most people buying education are pretty well off? Even those with bursaries? Most aren’t struggling to pay their gas bill.

I'm by no means a fan of Keir but it's not him your anger should be directed at.

It's your school for passing the tax increase on to you through increasing their fees!

Of course 90k children won't be 'forced' into the state sector; what rubbish. The impact on fees would be unlikely to be more than 10%, after claiming back VAT and cutting some costs (or putting the squeeze on super-wealthy alumni to up their donations). Plus, it only applies to 75% of private schools, including the most 'prestigious'. If you can afford £15K a year as 'disposable income', but not £16.5K...well, perhaps you'd be doing yourself a favour by finding out just how good the state sector can be these days.

That's like telling someone if you can't afford the cost of living and heating your home due to sky rocketing fuel bills and food costs then you shouldn't have ever lived in a house.

It IS targeted at wealthy people!
Do you think normal people can afford to send their children private? People can’t afford heating or food, there us no way normal people can afford to send their children private. You have a warped view of what constitutes wealthy/poor.
Wealthy = enough spare cash to send their kids private.

I think he just hates people that use loads of exclamation marks!