to expect my local cancel to pay for transport to a private school

[tootyflooty]

My dd has been offered a place at a theatre school, it is fee paying but not local and they do not have scholerships. I asked the council if they would provide the cost of a train pass, but were told no, because it is not our local state school.My argument is that by funding my dd education for the next 5 years (not easily affordable for us)I am saving the local education authority vast sums of money as they will not be paying for her place at the local state school, it seems unfair that we are penalised for our decision, She would get a free pass if our local school was over 3 miles away.Sorry to ramble but we have never had handouts from anyone and this seems grossly unfair.

Chafleur - I wont be paying council tax, no, as I have a tenant in my house, but I will be paying UK taxes on my earnings.

Pay for the train fayre gladly and thank your lucky stars your kid will escape a state school system thats falling to pieces.

Fayre?

No, I've never posted under another name. Am liking my better citizen points the more I get into it. 6% of children go to Private schools but the education there is much better than in the state system and parents sacrifice all kinds of things to give that benefit to their children for the good of the nation and we pay twice over. So good is it countries abroad always want to emulate our private school education and british schools are setting up branches abroad. It's one of the best educations in the world in the UK private sector. Those 6% then go on to comprise about 50% of most leading bodies, the cabinet, the C of E, the army, most plcs. In other words the tiny number whose parents sacrifice so much for the good of their children and the state then give this country that massive legacy of very well educated competent people who go on to lead the nation in so many areas in a way the state school educations people are just not on the whole as competent to do. the statistics speak for themselves.

On the whoel I doubt anyone here could deny that most children from private schools go on to contribute more to the country in terms of leadership and wealth and taxes paid and good citizenship than those at state schools. We should be applauded for educating our children in this way.

BS BS BS.

I thought I was a bit of a snob until I read your private school posts Xenia, I've never read such utter waffle.

I don't deny that people with high profile jobs often do a lot of good for the country but I'd argue those who have lower profile, not terribly well paid jobs often do more for society than anyone else e.g police, firemen, nurses, paramedics, teachers etc.

May I suggest you try removing your head from your backside as it's clearly resided there for a number of years.

And the statistics you quote are not just because privately educated pupils are more competent, there's also a great deal of them and us going on, and often people are rejected because they haven't gone to the ''right'' schools not because of ability.

Xenia,

I think there is an element of truth in the argument that a lot of high positions are filled by public school alumni. However I don't think this is necessarily due to merit. I think a lot of it is due to people assuming someone from Kings or eton is going to look better on their staff roll than someone from Basildon comp.

Also I believe there is a degree of 'Ah you went to my old school, come on in then' although of course I've no evidence for this,.

I am still not sure where my lying, cheating, self employed decorator of an ex comes into this though. He went to a very good school and look what happened.

snobby bullshit

Yes, but we do largely have a meritocracy nowadays and the good state people do get through to the top but even so not so much simply because they didn't have that good education. Therefore by me relieving the state and paying for my children to have a proper education which may be qualifies them for those types of roles above I do this country a huge service. Perhaps we rely on children from private schools to lead just about every body except left with local authorities. Even Blair went to a boarding school. Name me a leading plc board or the armed forces at the top or senior civil service and show me where it accurately reflects the 6% of children who go to private schools or even 20% and I will shut up but I know I'm right and you can't blame all this on people favouring people who went to the right school. If people weren't competent and confidant they wouldn't be able to stay in these roles soit must simply be either their good genes, breeding, brains which I imagine most of us don't necessarily accept so that only leaves the brilliant education their parents sacrificed much to achieve.

private school=proper education??!!

So state schools don't then?? Must tell DS1 to stop learning then, as he doesn't the predicted 5s and 6s in his SATs..

Should we bow Xenia, for the great service you perform for this country or will forelock tugging do?

actually I might pull my kids out of the state school, as it must be a fake school, as only Private schools can provided a 'proper education'

me too. Only private schools refuse to take disbaled children however bright they are. But honetsly, do you want your children to grow up with those sort of attitudes?

lol nmc

Yes my son is disabled, and very bright, and his state school have done him proud

actually - under the old assisted places scheme, I got my travel costs (and uniform to a certain limit) reimbursed - I was on a full assisted place, not sure if a sliding scale for those who paid some of the fees.

I've been staying away from a number of threads because the risk to my blood pressue is too high... But this thread's direction has left me unable to resist...

First, OP: YABU.

Second, Xenia: good grief. If you can't see how wrong you are, then I'm amazed. No, you're not wrong that the top jobs are full of public-school educated/Oxbridgey types, but that does not mean that's because they are the best educated or the best for the job... Rather, that the powerful class and social networking system in this country, which is only just beginning to fade, has made these jobs inaccessible to others.

Your argument is a syllogistic fallacy. Easy to do, I suppose...

I mean, even a small example (and only one angle) of how this problem has worked itself out in the past will show you how wrong you are:

It was only in the early 1960s (ie. when the current generation of near-retirement top-job holders were attending uni) that Cambridge and Oxford dropped Latin as an entry requirement. It took a decade for schools to catch up with this and start sending their kids for interview. Hundreds of well-educated and intelligent students could not attend these universities because their schools did not offer Latin (traditionally only available in independent or grammar schools).

Now, because Oxford and Cambridge are seen as the best unis in the country, employers typically recruit from them. Thus all those who didn't have Latin at school missed out. See?

Actually, to a certain extent, the same still applies with modern languages. Cambridge only recently dropped one modern language as an entry requirement.

Frankly, I hope these thoughts of Xenia's put paid to her (baffling) legion of admirers, who - I believe - are shamefully guilty of making the argumentum ad crumenam.

You only think it's a meritocracy, Xenia, because it's rewarded you.

It doesn't fall to the 'brilliant education' it falls to the name of the school and the nepotism of those who went before.

Honestly it is tempting to go one further on the 'can't be the parents' brains' argument but I shall forestall

you are simply buying your progeny a place in society

simple as that

its never been a meritocracy in this country. If you are white, male and go to a 'named' school then you get to be ahead. Its always been thus and still is thus. And given university fees will remain that way too. DD2 is very bright but can't go to a posh school because a, most are inaccessible and b, on top of any fees we'd have to pay for the one to one support and all the equipment as if you opt out of LEA schools they consider you opt out of evething. (so an extra £50K a year probably)
And do we see 50% of parliamtn/CEO's/consultants/any job you care to name that pays well as women? Nope.

I wish nepotism would occur here I'm sure it happens but not for everyone who went to public school. DH should obviously have stayed in contact with his ex fellow pupils.

I just want to add my bit to falcons post (which I agree with)

---BS BS BS.

I thought I was a bit of a snob until I read your private school posts Xenia, I've never read such utter waffle.

I don't deny that people with high profile jobs often do a lot of good for the country but I'd argue those who have lower profile, not terribly well paid jobs often do more for society than anyone else e.g police, firemen, nurses, paramedics, teachers etc.----

Not only that but the leading civil servants also do their fair share in cocking up the country whereas the nurses etc tend to do nothing but good.

wonder how many of those bankers/lawyers went to private schools....

Does it? But if that is so look at people my age. My school didn't do latin. If Labour knows you need foreign languages to get good jobs and plenty of jobs now will look at what GCSE choices you made - is your A media studies or French for example - then why don't they make all these supposedly bright children in state schools take foreign languages? Or if these people from private schools who lead our country, even those my age who didn't need latin etc, are really only there because of the school they went to or their accent why not say - none of those will be allowed by law to be directors in plcs. And why do they stay in those jobs?

I do know people who got jobs because of their family connections and if they aren't any good they do have to leave. Companies cannot afford bad staff however posh they speak. SO I don't agree with this - they are only there from nepotism. They are there because their traditional education was better, they learned more, they had better teachers, had an all round good education which is better and wider in the arts, music and sport than in state schools.

Anyway all good fun and it's perfectly open even to those women who earn enough to pay school fees to send their children to state schools if they prefer as it still remains a free country.. just

This made me chuckle in reference to Xenias idea that private schools turn out better educated pupils. I just asked DH if he thinks he has benefitted from nepotism. His reply....'whats nepotism?'.

He also added that most people who went to his school are toffee nosed, up their own arses snobs.

My cousin's husband went to Eton. Failed ALL his O-levels. Left with no qualifications whatsoever.

He then became Head of European Sales in some private bank owned by a friend's dad and lives in a marble palace somewhere or other.

Charming chap. Thick as shit.

If he'd gone to the local comp he'd be sweeping up at McD's.

Nepotism? Pah, how could you think so?