To think that people who agree with VAT on private school fees but not on university fees, are hypocrites?

[Blanket601]

If Labour add VAT to private school fees, they should also add VAT to university fees. Or no VAT on either. The principle and rule, should be the same.

Why is only private school education being platformed. I think we all know why.

Yes. It’s getting worse and worse. Violence is going through the roof in scottish schools. I’d like nothing better to be able to send my child there, but it would be criminally bad parenting to do so. And there are many, many parents in Scotland in the same boat. The logic is that if the crazy children are kept in mainstream schools the other kids might civilise them and the government might be able to avoid paying to keep them in prison in the future. Our kids suffer in the hope that money is saved in the future. Social engineering at its most dangerous

@StarlingsForever - “What are you actually hoping to achieve from this or is it just interest?”

In the short term, making sure the Council plans for numbers more accurately than in the past as they have form for ignoring the obvious shortfall of school places.
In the medium term, keeping the pressure on if any local private schools go bust and any land then lies there for years unused etc, wasted pools, grounds the lot for local children and the families and teachers etc affected.
And if it all goes horribly wrong, evidence for a full public inquiry into the policy.

I think we d all like to read something Labour comes up with, despite obvious bias.
But they just haven’t …….still waiting though.

The majority of academics would disagree with you. Labour may have introduced fees but finances for universities has got much worse since the Tories were in power.

This is a good idea
However empty buildings and unused pools are hardly going to be donated to the community, they are almost always owned by the school or (some) by a religious institution.
Everything will be sold off to the highest bidder.

Planners and Councils cannot, in the short term, force any private owner to do anything with empty buildings. ( except up council tax for residential properties )

So the modelling has only been done by Tories?

That is interesting. Regarding the grammars, is there a magical number and anyone in catchment meeting that score has to be offered a place? Or are they super selectives drawing from a much wider geographic area?

Not sure what that has to do with my post. I wasn’t talking about the ‘state’ of Universities current financial situation….
Id be amazed if academics in the field didn’t know the history of UK university funding…..which was the theme of my post.

Really! No…..It hasn’t

( If you are against the policy which it sounds like you are then I would assume you’ve read the evidence put forward….for and against
so you will know the answer )

Of course everyone knows that Labour introduced fees. However, the Tories tripled them. They also introduced the maintenance loan.

I don't really care that much and it certainly wouldn't sway my vote. I think it would probably raise money, at least in the short term and if it has a negative effect in the long term they could always reduce or stop charging VAT.

Well said, it’s just common sense …….

I'm not aware of any deleted posts, but I'm sure you wouldn't make that up for effect.

I could consider it an insulting personal attack when you said we were "whining" and said I'm "emotional" and "not credible". But I can live with it.

I haven't made any personal attacks. I use language extremely carefully and you've repeatedly twisted what I've said to suit whatever point you wish to make, often complete non sequitur as I quoted. Objectively, you haven't comprehended what I've written. I'm not fixated, I'm just both personally invested (as you rightly say) and also concerned that this policy is informed by those with both skin in the game and knowledge, like me, as well as those with the luxury of not being directly affected, like you (with your spare money and having already paid your DC's school fees).

This policy won't make money / could lose money and won't help / could harm state schools if even a small proportion of marginal families, like me and my peers, don't behave exactly as Labour expect. Which nobody can predict, but the risks are large and entirely negative.

Apologies I assumed with all your posts you did care and had done some back reading just to see how much it would cost the country.

Fair enough……I won’t waste your time responding again.

It's a shame people who care enough about this policy to join this never-ending discussion, don't care enough to read/research/reflect on the complexity of the unintended consequences.

I know this post was a month ago but
Bravo 👏👏👏

So when all private schools are taxed, it will affect far more people than you think.

Dance schools
Sports schools
Music schools

i hope the people who have to pay more are willing to pay more for their children’s extra curriculum studies. These schools are similarly unfair.

Very informative !
Worth reposting for those who are interested.

Basically, if you want to raise money for state schools, there are many better ways to do it. Taxing higher earners in general is a much better way. As you say, it's perverse to let top-quartile earners buying their way to exclusive good schools at taxpayers' expense off the hook, taking it out on those who pay for education themselves.

That's assuming the main problem with state schools is money, of course, which is debatable. There are plenty of examples where schools do more with less such as IGS Durham or Michaela. James Tooley and Katharine Birbalsingh are among the heroes of education and I don't see Bridget Phillipson beating their doors down for input. Which is a shame because, really, we all just want good schools.

(2) It's not about the money - Economics with Mr Chips (substack.com)

In New Zealand they also have a sensible model where there's GST but it's largely written off by a subsidy that equates to the GST on school fees around £20k; and also private schools' capex can be subsidised by public money. Dozens of countries have state-subsidised private schools in various forms. The UK's already unusual in the bitterness of the divide between state and private and this policy makes it worse.

Including their very worrying attitude to women……but that’s another thread….or maybe another 10.

A very good point
Any sudden introduction of such a high tax is irresponsible and indicates a complete lack of understanding and empathy.
A Government should never be allowed to do this especially when it affects children's education.

Perhaps they will chose to slash all benefits by 20%, just like that!

Labour are showing they are clearly capable of anything and it’s not like the country doesn’t need more money 🤔🤔

I'm only reading because I find the quite desperate attempts from some posters to convince everyone that this policy would have huge negative impact on the whole population rather than privileged well off people interesting. I haven't noticed anyone linking to actual unbiased research that might be worth reading but if you have any links to objective research rather than opinion from biased commenters/publications feel free to post them.

Ok so
@MisterChips I read on here you were accused of having some of your messages deleted.

Ive just gone through the whole thread, I hadn’t before.
There are two deleted posts ( both pro tax but whose counting) Neither of them are yours.

Cant remember who accused you but they were lying

No idea what people feel they have to gain by lying…..horrible habit!

1. Deleted Posts I am referencing this directly since your post insinuated that I could be making it up for effect. I am not.

VAT???????? THREAD
MisterChips · 29/04/2024 11:47
This reply has been deleted
Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines

Clearly your language is not being used as carefully as you think.

2. I already clarified that when I had referred to "whingeing" it was talking about a group and in no way personally directed at you. Your latest post chooses to twist this (again). Likewise I have said your analysis is clouded by emotion and that affects its credibility. I have never said that about you personally.

3. What does my spare money and whether or not I have already paid my DC's school fees or not have to do with anything? If the shoe were on the other foot and I were referring to this, I would be accused of politics of envy for that kind of jibe. You did this with another poster who was in a similar financial situation to me, calling them names (Champagne Socialist if I remember). Ad hominem ad infinitum it would appear.

I was not lying. Would you like to apologise?