High earners to pay for their children state schools

[Verycold]

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

If this happened, I am pretty sure that people in that income bracket living in expensive areas would limit their families to only 1 child, whilst poorer families would be able to afford to bring up bigger families.

SnowBells

I hope I don't sound condescending here, but I would hate to be young now. I do know how hard it is as we have ds1 22 and ds2 19 who I know will struggle, even living up here.
I just don't want young people to lose sight of the fact that whilst times are hard and everything is so expensive 80k is a lot of money to many.
I'm sure that your generation will reap the rewards in years to come, the same as ours did.
I know it doesn't seem like that when you are struggling.

I don't agree that buying a house in the South East gives you loads of benefits,. If you never sell your house (I won't) any increase in value is no us to you at all and you give 40% back to the state on death in inheritance tax probably having used through equity release the other 60% to fund your care.

We've gone a bit off topic ....but I'll bet Seldon is loving the furore his little report with its provocative recommendation has caused in the comments sections in media and here.

It's full time that people realise that the Tories are a "hit and run" government. They will hide behind any demographic in order to dismantle any "free" institutions in the U.K. They will even fuck over their "own" in an effort to do so.
These people have no intention of facilitating a fair and cohesive society. They appeal to base instincts and the general British disposition of always needing somebody to fuck over and look down upon. Anyone who denies said national characteristic is in some very serious denial.....especially the "fuck over themselves in order to prove a point" part.
The scary thing is that the Tories have even let this get out. So confident that any hare brained scheme of theirs will get support from the bad minded amongst us. The "poor" will like it because they see that they are already fucked. Might as well have the rest of creation dragged down with them. The rich middle class with Tabitha and Tarquin already parked at boarding school will like it because "how dare they have so much money and not spend as much as us on something that is already contributed for" mentality.
The working class will like it because most of us are stuck in a "chav" hating, monarchy and cheap celeb loving circle of "it could be worse if we lived in forrin" circle of hell, not daring to rock the boat and showing its racist arse at the same time.
A masochistic part of me really hopes that the Tories fuck the country to no return (to decency). Then we can start from scratch and not do that English thing of papering over the cracks.
A society that doesn't have free education for ALL (not based on income) isn't really a society at all (at least not in Anglo Western World where notions of "family", individuality and religion are all spinning in the air).

Custardo, I think you may forget that most of us live in a home, not an investment. We do need to live somewhere. The supposed "great start in life" you think we have given our children has started a bit late - we have only just managed to buy! We will pay it off, hopefully, just as we retire - we will still need to live somewhere then. Before we finally bought we were already in this wonderful income category proposed by Seldon and renting. What advantages exactly did that confer us?

There is a huge percentage of renters in London, in fact. Stats here, if anyone wants them:
www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/census/2011-census-analysis/a-century-of-home-ownership-and-renting-in-england-and-wales/short-story-on-housing.html

Headline stat for 2011 - "London had the highest percentage of renters, accounting for 50.4% of households in the region."

I think Seddon needs to learn to do maths. A family on £80k will have take home pay of about £50 (yes, a lot - not the point). Assume they have 2 kids - he expects them to pay £20k for each of them ? So they have £10k to pay mortgage, bills etc. Does this mean they will be able to claim benefits as they will be on a low wage ? Am I missing something here !!!!

STOOSHE You forget it was LABOUR who got is into the mess into the first place by spending uncontrollably while letting house prices go up...

I haven't read the whole thread but give me strength!!!!

I pay for my children's education at private school. I pay for other people's children's education via my taxes.

Does Anthony Seldon really want to drive even more people into the private school sector? I thought the left wanted more middle class people to stay in the state sector to bring up standards and wanted private schools taxed out of existence or shut down?

I am genuinely confused.

charley I really don't know what you're talking about with us recently gaining our good fortunes. Ratio of house prices / wages a lot higher now than in the 90s...

SnowBells

Charley was responding to my post which I went slightly off topic.
It was concerning fairness for all and bursaries.
How SOME people acquiring money can be offensive and down right nasty to those with relatively small incomes. This compared to people being born into great wealth who are nice kind approachable sociable and down to earth.
It was my fault, apologies.

Snowbells
The NHS costs a lot less per capita than Medicare and Medicaid, while covering the whole of the population rather than only part of it.
Pension "entitlements" in the USA are completely out of control, whereas in the UK they are rapidly being brought under control.

and only in the Socialist USA would the Government cover the mortgages of people who default - something that is unthinkable in Free Market Europe

morethan True, I guess. The nouveau riche thing. Don't belong to nouveau riche though... lack the bling and orange tan for that.

CharleyBarley I wouldn't have thought that a household income of £80k would be high enough to justify leaving the country. I would think the cut-off is higher than that given the moving costs, cultural and family costs, as well as the hidden additional costs that people don't always consider.

My colleague is British, but was living in Europe when he was recruited by our company. Our company paid the relocation cost of his family. Family costs… for us, this is minimal - my parents live abroad. Cultural costs… what is that anyway? My boss did ask me whether I wanted to move to the US one day (our global HQ is there). DH happens to work for a US company, too. He would actually get paid much, much more in the US as people with his qualification (scientific PhDs) are more valued over there than in the UK. However

TalkinPeace In the US, mortgages were provided to people who would never have gotten mortgages in the UK. But then again, people at that level of poverty would never think of buying a house here - not when the government pays housing benefit. Same thing really.

Snowbells
mortgages were provided to people who would never have gotten mortgages in the UK .... Same thing really
NO.
Non recourse mortgages - hand back the keys and walk away from the negative equity as Uncle Same will cover it
are uniquely American and long predate SubPrime.

I have clients still paying of their mortgage debts for houses that were reposessed in 1993.
In America the taxpayer would have covered them.
socialist housing

And the NHS is much cheaper and much more efficient than the US system according to any data set you check.

Pay in the USA may be higher but my family medical insurance costs would be over $2,000 a month - which rather cuts into the after tax income.

Dependency culture = right-wing bollocks. What has happened is successive Governments (but especially the Thatcher one) have ripped the heart out of numerous communities up and down the country and never replaced that industry or jobs, so of course you end up with successive generations out of work.

Add that to a low-wage economy - dozens of largely employers who effectively benefit from benefits as they pay so poorly that their employees have to be subsidised by the State just to get by.

Then the rich getting richer - vastly, the gap between rich and poor widens and recently an attack on the middle classes. This Coalition just wants an elite and a hoard of slaves to peel their grapes for them. Back to the pre-Victorian small (non-existent) state, no public services and everyone fends for themselves.

most employers pay your medical insurance in the US, TalkinPeace...I wouldn't say NHS is more efficient provided you are properly covered by insurance ...it's the uninsured in the US that have an issue

TalkinPeace - nibs777 is right. My company definitely pays for health insurance in the US.

Nibs
I'm self employed/ run my own business here and I would do if I moved back to the USA (CPA)
The US medical system spends far more than the UK one both as a percentage of GDP and per capita, while leaving huge chunks of the population not covered - Land of the Free and all that.

I think people are getting themselves wound up on something that will never in a million years happen.....

If this does happen ( I WILL BE ON THE STREETS THROWING PETROL BOMBS) I say this as a politically Centre right person.

If a policy like this came in to being, it is almost saying we are not a civilised society and what is the point of paying any tax if at the least we do not get free education.

My brother and his new "WIFE" would find themselves being targeted ( Unbelievable after the ten years he has had. He has just got going again with his new wife, to think because their joint income is over 80k Pa, he could end up paying up to 7k PA for his 12 Yr old stepson to go to a "STATE SCHOOL".

soul2000
In its raw form, indeed the idea is daft.
BUT Seddon has the ear of twits like Gove and Cameroon so his ideas may well pollute policy until they are voted out.

i don't think we are a civilized society anymore...i think allowing the country to become focused on being the investment capital of the bankers, mass and badly thought out immigration policies, non doms and millionaires/billionaires with black money from all over the world to invest here in London and South East in property et al put paid to that....and not just the Tories are to blame, it was Gordon Brown and Blair that presided over it for many years. Very few "ordinary" young middle class /first time buyers are going to benefit from overpriced housing, lack of real job prospects or and real economic stability.