To be gleeful that most of us were right

[Wranglestar]

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/adding-vat-to-private-school-fees-has-had-no-obvious-impact-on-state-sector-applications-390546/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR2ATdaVlNkJsbtC-KizuW4Fw41obnpvezxnFv4IAFwzJPHXmU90Awr5eqAaem9tMIsn9I0vHSC4jrdYONIA#0rd9makyd4264nstc4us9j77yk5kaoswtLondon Economic

And that private schools has had no impact on state school places. The rich have simply - paid more. Excellent news!

This is a bit of a weird take. It sounds as though this poster’s children hated school and she was happy to pay for another one.

@katbum. Yeah ok. Obviously I decided it was ideal to pander to my kids, almost lose my job over absence and get myself into serious debt rather than just "make them" go to school. They both loved primary and are perfectly happy to go to school and do school work. They were less keen on trying to make it through the day without getting shoved, pushed down stairs, unable to use the toilet due to bullies and not being able to eat lunch because the time allowed and numbers to get through didn't match up.

You clearly don't have the first clue what EBSA actually is. Why don't you go and educate yourself about it abs then come back. 🙄

Ignore that poster, @RhaenysRocks - she had a post deleted upthread where she wished harm on my child because of the choices we made for her. A very nasty spiteful piece of work.

Says the parent with a state provision offering that is adequate and meets the needs of their child.

It’s what happens when a Government uses spiteful rhetoric against a minority, brings out all the crazies.

Yes. The rich - that very marginalised minority. 😂😂😂

Plenty of kids have a hard time at school. Most of them have to get on with it. But yours are of course especially special and mummy has to pay for a special education to cater to their specialness. And of course, for this mummy deserves special tax breaks. Got it.

I didn't wish your child harm. I said harm will inevitably come to someone set up to believe they don't have to cope with the world as it is, that the world will make allowances for their needs. It won't. Unless they are rich and can buy their way out.

How do you physically force a secondary school age child to go to school?

ALL kids are especially special and any mummy worth the name will fight like hell to get them out of harm's way. There is no moral advantage to barely surviving 5 years of shit or being utterly broken by it. And since you used the term "tax break" you just again proved you have no idea of what you're talking about. I won't respond to you again.

There really is some ignorance on display here. My children are fortunate that I could buy a house in the catchment for a good school. I could have stayed where I was and gone private. A lot (not all) of people who bash private school are quite happy to pay a higher mortgage to go to the better school. Still privileged. And those who have school refusers have my utmost sympathy. Nobody wants to see their child distressed etc. Walk a mile in someone else’s shoes etc

How very untrue of you. I personally think it’s a shame that someone reported your post and MN deleted it because I was happy to let it stand for others in the thread to see exactly who you are. But it absolutely was a personal attack on her and no amount to wriggling from you now will change that.

Why should children just “get on with it”?
Most adults would not last a week in such an environment let alone 5 years - physical assault, verbal assaults etc - and nor should they.
But children are resilient aren’t they? FFS.

Its taking your anger at your poor life choices out on an 8 year old girl at prep school, all because her parents are Drs and work long hours.

That wasn't what we were told at the time, it was supposed to be a "Big Bang" moment where the state sector would collapse under the weight of ex private school children.

I argued that the wealthy always moan about paying extra, they didn't become rich by being wasteful and thats all we were hearing.

I'd expect PS demand to go up as Trumps self inflicted economic woes hit world economies - so even less funding for state sectors.

I understand that not all people that support VAT on school fees support it due to the so called 'politics of envy' but you @katbum are blatantly jealous AF!

Only takes a 10% shift for the policy to generate no cash. Over 10% and it costs the state. Risky.

The argument is mute, Labour were forced to reveal they were advised 54k children would be forced into the state sector (meaning the education tax would barely break even), 100 schools would be closed and state schools would be overwhelmed in certain areas. Pointless to keep pretending this is anything but spite aimed at children, you were either duped or you’re in favour of the Government deciding how we should all educate our children. It’s one step away from burning books the Gmnt don’t like.

10% is a huge number of families dropping PS, wont happen, as we've seen.

Fees over the last decade or so have gone up in real terms more than the VAT increase, yet numbers went up.

Schools don't need to pass on the full increase, by doing nothing, the increase should be 15%, with a slight increase in class sizes, they could bring it down further but few have done this, most have passed on the full 20%, meaning they've baked in a real terms fee increase.

Because they know their clients can afford it.

Like i said the moaning was primarily done by people who want to hang on to every penny.

If you look at the notes from the legal action, the treasurery advised Labour that 54k children would be forced into the state system over 2 years. Very close to the 10%,

I think you re being ridiculous, as your scary scenario hasn't and wont happen.

I don't give a xxxx how people educate their children, however, the country has no money, borrowing is at all time highs, the Tories cut NI, thats costing the Govt £10bn per year.

IFS say this policy will raise around 5 to 6bn over the course of the Parliament.. 5 years.

Labour have no choice but to go after any increase in indirect taxes they can OR reverse the NI cuts but that would hurt the poorer worker, in order to save the wealthy money.

Well the documents that were shared in the recent court case by the Government’s OWN lawyers confirmed that is the number that the Treasury have estimated will move to the state sector over a period of years.

I dispute that most have passed on 20%. Do you have figures for that? The majority of schools that I am aware of have passed on a lower amount. My DC’s school was 12.5%. The problem is that they are also impacted by the loss of business rate relief and NI increases (and also had to deal with the increase in the TPS contributions in the past 12 months) so there is a lot of pressure on finances.

This is just populist nonsense, the idea that ‘the wealthy’ can afford anything. Usually an idea put forward by entitled people who’ve never contributed anything.

It’s not my scary scenario, it’s the treasury. It’s all in the publicly available notes from last week, I suggest you have a read. If you want to restrict education choice or just have a pop at these kids then argue on that basis, don’t dress it up in this nonsense.

New figures out today state that London has fallen out of the top 5 of wealthiest cities. In the past year - apart from Moscow - some comparison there. The UK has lost more millionaires than anywhere in other country in the world. Countries like France have gained them. Until the government stop trying to appeal to the lowest common denominator with dog whistle policies - this will keep happening. I don’t know where people think all this lost wealth/tax/investment is coming from.

Oh it’s not, as the majority (who are state dependent) are now finding out through welfare and state job cuts. Even a 5 year old could do the dot to dot.