High earners to pay for their children state schools

[Verycold]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-25798659

For one thing let's not forget how well off you have to be to afford private schooling. Most middle-class parents can't afford to send their DC private - I think it's less than 10% of parents that do.

I do wonder if it would be sensible for parents to pay into the NHS to improve maternity care though. Resources seem so stretched and the experience for women both during labour and on post-natal wards is often lacking. Meanwhile parents spend so much on buying all the latest gear for their new baby because we all want them to have the best start in life.
I feel this would be more sensible than paying for schooling, partly because it's a more one off (or 2,3 etc) occurrence.

But I digress .... (perhaps for a new thread sometime?)

Norude, education at school is not compulsory. Parents can educate at home if they wish in the UK. Also plenty of the top day schools in the land (private) have a wide range of buses put on by the school and they put children in classes with those who live near them so that their friends are not too far away. It works very well. So the state system could certainly do the same and bus rich children from rich areas to state schools in poor areas to achieve fairness.

Anyone who has done quite well and might have to pay these state school fees making arguments against them about unfairness etc should think about what those of us who pay fees currently suffer - we pay twice and indeed in a sense 3 times as we pay the higher rates of tax too.

As a general principle IMO, human beings should be compassionate and try to make life fairer for everyone, and help people who are less advantaged.

But where do you draw the line.
Do you make life financially and education all worse for your own children in order to provide better chances for someone else's children?
Do you off to take a bunch of less privileged kids with you every time that you visit a museum or library with your own children, regardless of whether your own children want to be in the company of those children or not?
Do you buy bundles of books every month and distribute them amongst households with children who don't have any books?
Do you force people to be more involved in their children's education to improve their children's chances?

Katnip

yes, you were lucky....you won a lottery of sorts by buying a house in a particular area and sitting on a house that went up exponentially through no special effort of your own ....perhaps in your case, fairness means it should be re-distributed by a special property tax when the profit is so exponential compared to the effort or contribution ...but some just merely do work hard for their income...quite a lot actually.

Laurabridges - who do you propose is going to pay for the buses? Is that another charge for more affluent families?
Private schools charge for their bus services and the charges are not cheap.

Laurabridges - I pay private fees for one of my children and I don't understand your argument about the fees that you are suffering - nobody forces us to use private schools. Charging for state schools isn't even comparable.

But where do you draw the line?

Exactly.

People seem to forget we already have the NHS to fund.

Not many countries provide free healthcare. I think some people here don't understand it's already fairer than most countries.

Agree with barbour though. Property tax would also stop developers from hogging land...

"Parents can educate at home if they wish in the UK. "

Which parents LauraBridges?....oh, the ones that have the luxury or option of not working ....

Bussing children here and there for miles by compulsion for a political point ....makes no sense

But a huge part of why we use our local state school is so resources are not wasted on travelling and to be part of a community. If bussing and or fees were introduced we'd decamp to private, which I suspect is what this headmaster would approve of.

laurabridges "Anyone who has done quite well and might have to pay these state school fees making arguments against them about unfairness etc should think about what those of us who pay fees currently suffer - we pay twice and indeed in a sense 3 times as we pay the higher rates of tax too."

Are you for real? LOL, its your choice to pay twice. This policy is about removing choice, and further the bar in which one is determined to have 'done quite well' is certainly not one that affords the level of fees being discussed in my personal experience, aside the fact its completely immoral and our children should all have access to a free education equally where it is compulsory. I will not be financially punished for working hard, if the government so which to do so, I will stop working hard and seek reward is less taxes and more time with my family.

countryside dwellers ...... do not campaign for more public transport.
ABSOLUTE BOLLOCKS
campaigns for rural buses are a massive issue but urban governments cut the funding for them to allow twaddle like HS2
which would pay for free buses for the whole country for years

fwiw

I have good friends with very clever DCs who looked seriously at Wellington, and decided against it for two main reasons 1) the cost of 30k a year plus was not justified by its academic position against other "elite" schools similarly priced despite its oversubscription and 2) the sheer amount of media press the head courts with his controversial soundbites like this and his view about how Oxbridge favours state candidates over equal candidates in his school being the hatred of private schools that dare not speak its name or whatever.

So... can someone please say when to draw the line?

What if we really switched the children from the 'good' school tp the bad school and vice versa... and the only thing that changes is that the 'bad' school becomes the good one? And the 'good' school turns bad?

What if - finally - people realise it's not just the school but home environment, too? Even Katnip admitted that played a big part in her success.

For the sake of being all equal... are we meant to then do some sort of 'kid swap'?

How far should the equalisation process go until all motivation to do anything is lost???

I already pay a huge amount in taxes and I would resent having to pay to use the state system without a significant tax rebate.

My current personal circumstances allow me to send both my children to a private prep school. I would however, consider paying for a state education on top of the tax I already pay only if the state school was up to the standard of the equivalent private school of my choice.

I would also expect the state school to be selective and account to me for the money I am spending in the same way as the prep school does. If it was not in a position to provide me with the same or better then there would be no incentive to pay. The bottom line is that I would want my monies worth.

FWIW I think the proposal is ludicrous and that it will create an even bigger divide.

In Victorian times the great philanthropists were the very wealthy - industrialists - the nouveau riche if you like.

The middle classes - clerks, the new army of white collar workers - was as ever thrusting away - and no one was expecting them to reduce their circumstances to help the poor.

These days there only seems to be one sitting duck when it comes to raising revenue: the poor bugger on PAYE. It 'll become like Greece or Italy here - people will go to any lengths to keep under the state's radar and avoid punitive taxation.

gaba Tue 21-Jan-14 06:37:40

"All the 'Jones's' types are squealing like pigs being gutted. "100,000 that's positively breadline, 'tis not fair".

Can understand why though, the writing is on the wall.

The government is hungry for money.
The poor don't have any.
The rich wont give any.
That leaves you guys...
Expect a knock at the door."

genius - and so true

No The CrimsonQueen

It won't work that way, Seldon's proposal is that a quarter of the money raised through charging should be retained by the school, with the rest redistributed among other state schools.

I can really see middle class parents buying into that ....paying to go state in the same amount as a good private would cost and the vast majority of the money is not even being spent on the school or its facilities itself....

it's just another form of income tax..this time linked to use of state education. It's wacky in the extreme.

wacky and not "genius" at all...

I like the way gaba talks about "you guys"...but hasn't identified whether he /she is poor, rich or a squeezed middle......usually these posts come from the politics of envy i find.

Custardo this man doesn't want to raise money for the government or state schooling. He wants to detach a group of high earning parents from state education and get them over into the private sector.

the government have squeezed the poor until there is very little left to give.

They will not take the owed billions of taxes and close loop holes for the very rich

that leaves the MC

I think Gaba's summary is an excellent one. and not wacky at all.

to reduce another's opinion to that of being envious is dismissive and unfair. Many people have expressed opinions without giving a personal statement of accounts

the post adds nothing at all to the debate ...and I think I know which side of the fence he/she is from...like i said politics of envy

Ehm... Custardo... in what way has the government squeezed the poor????

It is well-known that UNLESS you earn over the median wage (or even more) you do take more out of the system than you contribute.

Better still...

" the poor are squealing like pigs being gutted when their benefits are cut....it's not fair"

How does sound Custardo ..."genius...and so true" "excellent" or just wacky?

Adding to the debate with an intelligent comment or not at all?