Corbyn, vat, private schools

[NoisingUpNissan]

So... Just worried about corbyn and private schools.

I'm naturally labour but couldn't vote for him with this.

We have two kids in prep, couldn't really afford any extra cash. As it stands we have a leaking bathroom (no bath for a year) and old unreliable shitty car, certainly not entitled or priveledged people. Not that it should matter.

Very annoyed as they are only there because ASD and they had 33 kids in their classes!

So, just wondering... Does anybody think this is a real risk?

I don't care if I come across as being all out for myself, I'm all out for my kids. My son is just too autistic to deal with a big class size and needs the extra work as he's v bright.

Why is it cruel? He got the same grades he would have for in any other school.

How can you possibly know that? On the contrary, he would most probably have done much better at a good private school than the “failing” one dictated by your ideology.

Why is it cruel to provide your children with poor opportunities rather than good ones, if you have the choice? That’s quite the bonkers question if it’s serious, which I doubt.

“Why is it cruel? He got the same grades he would have for in any other school.

How can you possibly know that? ”
Easily.

Easily

So the quality of the school would have made no difference then? What utter bullshit. I’d love a holiday to your dream world, but I certainly wouldn’t want to live there.

It’s really odd how some people cling to the view that kids can’t do well at state school. Oh, unless it’s “leafy”. Then they can do quite well.......

I 100% support an end to private education and this policy would incline me to vote for them. Imagine if all that time/money were spent actually improving the state school system for all kids.

No, kids do better at better schools. Your denial of that simple fact discredits anything else you might say. Or did the failing school produce a perfect run of A stars? I’ll bet anything that it didn’t!

No. Labour are simply shooting themselves in the face, to complete the implosion of British politics.

@BertrandRussell

I do not see why education should be particularly singled out as something where it is wrong to want more than the basic state provision.
If you want more than the state provision, then you pay for it. You do not expect other people to contribute to it.
You have missed the point. In theatre and the arts, in health and social care, in recreation, in all these other sectors, there are services available that some people can't afford and some can. In all these sectors it is possible for these either to be provided on a for-profit basis or on a charitable basis. Charities still make charges they just don't make a profit. Why is education different in your view? Or should all these other sectors also be restricted to state-provision only in your view?

Or do you want to redefine "Charity" to mean only "organisation that gives everything they do away for free" and remove charitable status from the National Trust, residential care homes and a myriad of other worthy organisations which do things that cost money and charge for it without making a profit?

@verticality What money do you think the state schools will be getting? Whose time will they be benefiting from?

This will COST a huge amount to implement plus you then have to pay for those that would have been in private to have a state place which costs the government money. Do you think those parents are going to send their kids to a failing state school? Nope. Some will leave the country, some will buy property near the best state schools pushing out even more disadvantaged kids. And all those SEN kids? They cost A LOT of money.

Why not invest in making state schools better? Lower the class size. Make it more humane for the teachers and the students. Add in the extra curriculars.

“You have missed the point.”

No- I may not have made myself clear. Education is compulsory, and is provided by the state, paid for by the tax payer (also compulsorily). If you want a different education than that provided by the state, then you are welcome to pay for it. However, the tax payer should not be expected to contribute to it.

The taxpayer isn’t.

And we do pay for it.
God I’m so bored of these people.

"What money do you think the state schools will be getting? "

Sorry, I wasn't clear, was I? I'd also support massive tax rises for those in the higher tax brackets (especially those earning over £150k) precisely to make state schools and the NHS better. If people want to move abroad, then fine, but I think we should take their British citizenship off them when they do. If they're not prepared to pay in, they shouldn't get the benefits.

Germany’s state system is divided into gymnasiums and technical schools (similar to grammars and secondary moderns except that their technical schools are very advanced compared to our old ones).

German trades (eg construction, mechanics etc) require training at a technical school. There are apprenticeships with major companies so students combine study and on the job training. The result being that Germany has lower youth unemployment than here.

And also don’t preach to parents of kids with SN about how they shouldn’t worry about this. We know the reality; we live it. You just make yourself look stupid.

The tax payer is not contributing to it at all, except to the same extent that the tax payer "contributes" to all the other thousands of charities that receive no direct government funding but are taxed as charities because they make no profits. You have not given any justification why educational charities should be less favourably treated in this regard.

If you want a different education than that provided by the state, then you are welcome to pay for it.

So you actually oppose Labour’s batshit policy? Good to know!

“You have not given any justification why educational charities should be less favourably treated in this regard.”
I’m afraid that if you can’t see the fundamental immorality of private schools being treated as charities, then I’m pretty sure nothing I can say would change your mind.

bert

Maybe those who live in areas of bad schools, have nothing else but to cling on to how bad they are. It must be nice to have choice of good schools, rather than know it makes not one jot of difference which you choose at secondary as they are all as bad as each other. No leafy comps here, I'm afraid.
We'd be pretty fucked without the taxpayer and about a thousand other parents at least. So thank you and others for their 1p tax or whatever.
But, if you believe in social mobility and not just keeping some schools for the rich and elite why support removing charitable status?

Sorry- that sounded like a very playground “well if you don’t know i’m not going to tell you” I didn’t mean that. I just meant that if two people have fundamentally different ideologies, they can talk about it, but they aren’t ever going to change each other’s minds. I am philosophically and politically opposed to the whole idea of private education, and the thought of private schools being charities - a charity for the benefit of the rich!- is deeply distasteful to me.

Diane Abbott sent her son to City of London Boys. But apparently that was all right because it was 'a long time ago'.

Fuck off, Diane.

It wasn’t all right that Diane Abbot sent her son to private school. Who says it was?

she does. Apparently it's perfectly all right for her to send her son private but want to abolish that right for anyone else.

But you know that, Bertrand. Even when you posted I’m pretty sure they could all afford private education for their children if they wanted it.' you knew that. They can afford it and some actually went ahead and did it. But no-one else should be allowed to.

Diane I imagine....

I know some of them use private schools. I have always been outraged by it.