Can’t just be me who is sick of the moaning about the private school VAT and winter fuel payments

[TruthorDie]

The moaning about them seems to be never ending. So tone death and indulgent on both counts. Not sure which is worse. A friends mum was ranting on social media earlier about winter fuel payments being stopped and how “worried about being cold” she was. Bad news is Lynn you haven’t needed to work since 1989, married to an oil exec and have had lots of the good life. I’m sure all of your Florida holidays keep you warm enough!

Bright children can get on anywhere, my siblings and l went to a comprehensive. We all have a couple of degrees, one of us has a PhD so it didn’t hold us back too much in life. Before anyone comes at it from the neurodiversity angle then l am and l wouldn’t be surprised if my younger sibling isn’t

I have no issue with migration - providing they are not simply economic migrants. A points system similar to Canada and Australia would be a good start.

Pensions aren't benefits, but Gordon Brown taxed pensions and it has been suggested that taxes on pensions will increase (both putting money into pensions and taking money out).

No, of course not. Occupation is not a helpful way to categorise people into demographics for the purpose of the points I and the poster I was responding to were making, given its quite obvious that train drivers may be represented in many demographics, as may junior doctors. Given the context of the thread I'd have thought it fairly obvious I'm referring to those occupying a certain position of wealth/privilege that they feel was better preserved under a Conservative government, and who are now anxious that Labour will prioritise the less well off to their own disadvantage. People who have lived for years in a society with a very obvious division between those concerned about school fees and those concerned about paying for food. Yet are now trying to suggest it's the Labour government who have created division.
I'm not sure why you think that's a naive thing to say?

The triple lock pension has to be dropped at some point otherwise pensions will consume the entire UK spending at some point. Not a debatable point but a mathematical fact. Who is going to be brave enough to do it?

The same person willing to tackle the NHS,
probably.

Yes no more 25% tax free pension withdrawal.

But pip and dla are gateway benefits, there is no official registration card to prove you are disabled in this country so most places where reasonable adjustments are required require proof of pip or dla, if it was means tested it would need to be possible to have a nil award. Also pip/dla is supposed to put the disabled person in the same position of a non disabled peer by covering the extra costs of being disabled, this actually enables many pip claimants to actually work.

Gordon brown didn’t tax pensions they were always taxable as part of income, well at least as far back as I remember and that’s way before the last labour governemnt.

What he did do was change the tax credit system on dividends paid out by companies so the tax credits could no longer be claimed back. This effected anyone who was in receipt of dividends and didn’t pay tax but the main investors in the uk are the pension schemes so they were the most effected.

Too true. It’s simply not sustainable

Absolutely agree - I have no idea where my students went to school, I don't care and frankly wouldn't dare ask in case I was accused of discriminating in some way.

I think this is really true. I claimed PIP not because we were desperately in need of the money (although we are by no means well off either) but because of the doors it opens, the main one being 'queue jumps' at concerts, theme parks, holiday venues etc, which means I can take my children to these things and they don't miss out on more than they already do with having a mum with a disability. If I could access these without the PIP at no cost to me, or if places had better disability access (for example we have to pay an extra £240 for early access passes at Butlins as I cannot queue) at no cost, then I wouldn't claim it. But whilst the support for those with disabilities is patchy, the PIP enables me to pay for things which give us equivalent access to those without a disability. It is what it says on the tin, it makes me more independent. It funds a car so I can still get to work, and I then put more in to the system in tax than it costs the taxpayer each month. For many PIP claimants, it's a really cost effective benefit in terms of cost- benefit, as its a benefit claimed by many working people.

It took a huge swallow of my pride for me to claim it, and I didn't for the first 3 years following developing a disability, as I had been brought up to never claim benefits, and also struggled to admit I had a disability, the whole process was quite traumatic. If another hurdle had been added in of means testing, I probably wouldn't have claimed, and our lives would be much more limited.

The people who are so keen to see a return to it that they are already complaining, criticising and scaremongering with increasing hyperbole about the alternative.

perhaps if posters weren’t wasting £20k plus on schools fees per child they wouldn’t be so worried about any tax increase needed to pay for everything else.
I know posters on MN are all sending their kids to super inclusive schools that lend the plebs their pools and only charge £5k a year but they’re the anomaly as the average day fees are now around £18/19k a year.

Err we have a points based system, with min income and skills levels required.

What on earth do you think someone coming here to work is? they are by default, an Economic Migrant.

Why have numbers gones from approx 200k to 700k ?

But would you have had your child faced significant bullying or had unmet SEN needs and your circumstances did not allow a move to a different catchment? So so many posters on these threads refuse to acknowledge that in many areas the state system is actively damaging children. Getting an EHCP now is a torturous slog with incredibly high thresholds, an almost automatic refusal without appeal or tribunal and takes years whilst a child is left unsupported.

As a parent I take whatever steps are in my power to do the best for my kid and for them, that was a move to a small, non selective, pastorally brilliant school. I'm in debt to do it and the extra 20% will only increase that. I would LOVE to not have to, I absolutely believe all kids should have access to what they now do. I'm not interested in keeping away from "plebs", or preserving privilege or any of the other judgemental sneers, I'm just keeping my kid safe and healthy. To actually improve the state system to a point where the above situation is not the case will take at least ten times what this policy is allegedly going to raise. But that would be FAR less of a vote winner with the 93% so the pointless raid on the 7% was the answer. It will do basically nothing in real terms to improve anything, and actively harm some...my kid can name friends who are leaving their safe and familiar school as soon as their parents can find a state place. When you start putting real names and faces to this policy it becomes far less of a "win".

That clarifies things, thanks.

Oh wait, it really doesn’t.

Talk about being obtuse.

Your school doesn't need to pass on the full 20% does it? around 5% will be reclaimed, they can cut back another 5% with slightly larger class sizes.

We had to move schools because of relentless bullying & lost the free school transport, so around £1000 per year on top, no ifs or buts, we couldn't afford that either.

Over the term of this Govt, VAT on fees will raise around 7 billion for state schools.

Again, a lot of ignorance about how many small private schools work. V tight margins is one. They are looking for ways to.mitigate this but they don't have the headroom that lots of people assume schools have. Class sizes...the rooms were built to house small classes. They can't fit 30. They can't physically fit in more. A lot of what makes the school what it is would go if they crammed in a load more kids, fired some staff and dropped the extra curricular and wraparound they provide.
The "7 billion" is pure conjecture and not remotely agreed upon by independent economic think tanks. As I said, contrary to what some posters think, I'm not trying to separate my kid, or give them an advantage over others...I think every child is deserving of the same experience mine is now getting. I just disagree that this policy is the way to do it. If, in 5 years, we have thousands more state teachers, fully staffed SEN departments, no more schools falling down and the rates of EBSA have dropped due to kids being happy in 1000+ comps then I'll admit I'm wrong.

@RhaenysRocks I did say (in a previous post, to be fair) that I realised that there was a difference when it came to SEN.

I'm not sure what exactly you're struggling to understand, but think of it as a Venn diagram maybe? So in one circle, you have people who did well under the Tories. So in the last 14 years they have built and lived affluent privileged lives. They have wealth and they have been able to use that wealth to further advantage themselves. They haven't had to worry too much about failing services because they can afford to buy better ones.
In another circle you have people who come onto MN to complain about Labour policies, predict disaster, call the PM silly names, make absurd parallels with communism and so on. Where those two circles intersect, you'll find the people I'm referring to. Does that help?
Because the only way I can think you might not understand is if you think no one did well under the last government? Which would be an odd position for a Conservative to take. Perhaps you voted Reform?

thank you - it's a big issue but they have said, contrary to earlier rumours that even those with EHCPs will not be exempt from this and a lot of the SEN kids in private are there because they couldn't get an EHCP in time for their schooling to actually be positively impacted by it. The gov is so far not responding to these concerns at all and just keep banging on about this very untested theory that it will bring in 1.5bn a year and magically produce more teachers. I get tired of pp on this talking about the "tiny minority" that they grudgingly admit might be badly affected. When you ARE that tiny minority, its pretty frustrating to read the the sneery, gleeful jibes about "Sebastian and Arabella" slumming it with the plebs etc.

My mum is affected by the winter fuel payment. She worked hard all her life but with a minimal private pension (by which I mean almost nothing - like £10 a month). My dad passed away too young for her to benefit from his pension so she only has her state pension. She isn't entitled to anything else because she also owns her home. She has friends who didn't build up their years for a full state pension and now get pension credits and are much better off than she is, having holidays and eating out several days a week. It makes me really angry. She is also going over the threshold so will start saying income tax on her state pension which is all she has to live in. She is 78 and has to work part time for some extra cash. She doesn't get any of the extra benefits her friends on pension credits get and she has a lower monthly income.

Some schools might not have the room, plenty more will have and they don't have to go to 30 plus in a classroom, why not just a small increase? drop some of the sport on offer? and/or charge the parents who can afford it, more for the extras?

The mid level private school my brother used, employs a Physio and a Horse Groom.

The IFS, one the UKs biggest think tanks, says 7 billion is more than realistic, so its wrong to say "no one agrees money can be raised"

No you won't be wrong, 7 billion wont fix all the issues in state schools but it will help & if that 7 billion isn't raised by VAT, who should pay it instead?

You poor mum, I am so sorry. I feel really sad thinking about elderly people not being able to afford things for themselves. Because my mum was one of them and I. Helped her out the best. I could, but you know I was struggling myself when I was younger.

How is it right that because your mum? Owns her home. She's not entitled to any help. Contrast this with a younger person. When my sister was in her late 30s, her husband divorced her because she cheated on him. He had to pay her out a quarter of a million. She bought a mortgage free property with that. She is too lazy to work. She works very part-time hours. Teaching gym classes and IM talking about 5 hours a week if that. She earns less than a 100 pounds a week and that is entirely by choice.

Even though she's divorced; she doesn't feel she should have to work and wants to be kept in the manner of which she's accustomed to when her husband kept her. Whilst she was having affairs behind his back.

Her mortgage free home isn't taken into account. And she's on universal credit and goodness knows what else because of her low-income. My sister is now early 40s and fully capable of working. She is healthy. Her child is nearly at secondary school now. And spends 50% with the dad. My sister refuses to work because she has a child. How is it right that somebody who is young and can work and doesn't want to and owns property outright isn't made to get off their backside and get a job or have their benefits taken away or have their home taken into account? But a vulnerable older person, can I mean I think? It's disgraceful.

But no one will agree on here simply by virtue of having had a child.Some people think you never need to work again even though you capable of it, but elderly people well, fuck them.They can go and pay for themselves.

Misinformation is rife on here. Owning her own home would not prevent claiming pension credit or savings credit. It's based in her income, other investments, savings, etc, not on owning your main residence.