If labour win the election can they introduce VAT immediately?

[londonparent321]

(For school fees) Or do they need to go through the courts which could take years /never happen?

I did not say anything about a country full of super high earners and serviced by worker drones.
You do know that so please don’t skew my words

I stated, again, that we need people who earn more than 41k and we rely, whether you like it or not, on higher tax payers and on people prepared to pay twice.
Without higher earners we run at a deficit.

If we re all going to earn less than 41k then we ll all be equal, financially at least , but we’ll all have to pay a lot more on all earnings in tax just to get the very bare minimum back in services. Those services and available benefits won’t even scratch the surface of those currently available.

Its simple maths.

Well said. 👍

So, just to clarify, the ideal is that we all earn under £41k......?!

@Herecomesthesunshine83 ,

Earnings aren’t the target. Having a happy productive society is and, right now, as a country we are dismally failing,

How you earn a big salary matters. if you are an entrepreneur, an inventor or a heart surgeon (inter alia), then you are making a massive contribution to society, as well as the taxes you pay.

OTOH, if you run an online casino company, for example, and you pay yourself 100 million and pay full taxes of 45 million on it, you are not a net contributor, you have just redistributed cash from other people to yourself without net producing anything useful.

The idea that being paid a lot and paying tax on it is always societally positive just isn’t the case.

Gosh I hope we all fall within a morally acceptable category!

I think you’re a little blinkered. Most private school children are no more segregated from society than state children. State schools are not all the same creatures any more than private schools are. I have taught in different parts of the country in private, ultra selective grammar and state, including some seriously deprived state schools. The most diverse schools by far were the privates, both in terms of ethnic and yes, economic diversity. It is true that the private children did not mix IN school with impoverished people but the schools covered just about every other economic strata. The grammar was mostly full of quite well off parents and almost entirely one ethnic background and the deprived state I worked in the longest was also of one ethnic background where it was a constant battle to get the pupils to respect other people and not just regurgitate attitudes from the gutter press that they’d heard their parents spout; they were the most insular students I’ve ever met so no, I don’t think they would make ‘the best artists’. As far as creativity goes, there is far more freedom for that in the private sector- state school lessons (with the exceptions of grammars) are extremely prescriptive and therefore restrictive too. Finally, many private schools also have buildings that are falling down- they’re not all Eton! The point is, all schools have different makeups and blanket statements really shouldn’t be made for any of them.

Again, I didn't argue that state schools are more creative, impossible with no arts funding available anyway which incidentally was apparently a LOL to some posters on here, I explained how private schools are too prescriptive with their approach to creativity and that wouldn't be an advantage for my DD, she is a talented Artist anyway and needs more free time to pursue that and playing an instrument than the private school day would afford her.

You've worked in the most deprived schools and yet you think private schools reflect most accurately the diversity of economic backgrounds in society? Really?

Well maybe the schools can start a Go Fund me page for their falling down schools.

Exactly!

Some may have seen my posts as I work in this sector. The majority of our income comes from the disparity in the system and private education sector.

I will keep my ins and outs to myself, but what I will say is, unless my child had SEN, I would never send my child to a private school. Not because I’m ideological or believe in ensuring my child is down to earth. Privates just aren’t very good. Having been on the inside. When you understand why results are as they are, you realise where the best teachers are placed: the state schools. Often the worst performing ones.

Your exact words:"Personally, it would be too prescriptive for my DC, particularly my youngest DD, she needs to be in a creative environment and I think that is limited at private school". So yes that does infer that you believe state schools to be more creative.
You didn't offer any other context within that post.

I too work I education although not directly in schools. Your pov only works for areas which have good state schools/grammar schools as I believe you offer online tutoring.
In areas without grammars and where the only local state offer is dire then private makes sense.

Privates just aren’t very good. Having been on the inside.

If that’s the case then why are so many people so keen to abolish them on the grounds they give an unfair advantage?

I know numerous teachers in the state sector who choose to use private schools for their own children, so they obviously have a different point of view. There are good and bad private schools. It’s not possible to generalise and say all “privates just aren’t very good”.

Good point, I didn't phrase that correctly, I didn't elaborate, a state school environment is a shorter day and lets her pursue her interests in her own time.

And again: diversity means variety. Not deprivation.

Is this the lol you mean?

Lol at getting a more creative timetable in state schools when most have pared back their arts/drama/music to the minimum

It's pretty obvious the lol is at your fantasist worldview, isn't it? It's not laughing at the reduction of provision in state schools.

It's odd, because you've accused me upthread of poor comprehension - but I find the way you twist what people are saying really strange. I wonder whether it's just to make a point, or do you really not see that you are?

My point is that all schools can’t be painted with the same brush. Some private schools are rich; some are not. I have been in state schools which are in a woeful state of disrepair but they have always had heating and windows that closed. However, I have experience of 2 private schools where both the pupils and I had to wear coats in the classroom because there was either no heating in a freezing mobile or massive holes in the windows (actually snowed on). The grammar school, technically a state school, had incredible facilities. Often, funds in private schools are actually spent on having enough staff rather than on facilities or books.
The private schools were far more diverse. The last deprived state school I worked in was 3rd gen unemployed where pretty much everyone was on benefits and virtually no one had ever left the town that they lived in. It represented the bottom end of the economic scale very effectively but had no representation of anyone else on the scale. The privates, on the other hand, had a few very rich parents but they were the minority. They were mostly an eclectic mix such as you’d find in any state school in a middle-class area: the parents were made up of teachers, nurses, physios, builders, nail technicians, chefs, GPs… and as they were day independents the kids did their extra curricular activities with everyone else from the area outside of school. Admittedly, they wouldn’t be likely to be mixing with kids such as were found in the very deprived school but they were exposed to a much broader spectrum of society and economic backgrounds than the deprived kids were and to exactly the same people as the local state kids were. With the exception of the ultra posh public schools most kids at private schools don’t come from a filthy rich background.

You are really stretching the imagination with your definition, does diversity in this context just mean 'variety'. The definition of diversity is: 'the practice or quality of including or involving people from a range of different social and ethnic backgrounds and of different genders, sexual orientations, etc.'

The definition of private school is: 'an independent school supported wholly by the payment of fees'

How can a type of school that is supported wholly by payment of fees fulfill the definition of diversity, including people from a range of social backgrounds, when 95% of parents in this country can't or don't pay for school, are you really trying to suggest that within the 5 or 7 percent of people that do pay fees for schools a "range" of social backgrounds exists, this is simply untrue, there maybe none at some schools let alone a 'range'!

@Goldenbear you seem to fixate on one very specific element of diversity (economic) to the exclusion of all others (race/ethnicity, cultural, gender, etc.). You are correct that most private schools are not ‘representative’ of broader society in that they don’t reflect the precise mix of society at large. Few state schools would meet that criteria though, as communities segregate themselves and therefore catchments will reflect that segregation.

you are incorrect however in your implication that all sectors of society are not represented in private schools. Schools will vary in extent of diversity- true for state as well as private - but the private school in my area is much more diverse by any metric than the state school we left.

Our state school was a village primary in an area of higher than average home prices - almost everyone was middle class or above, and it was 100% white native English speaker. It also had a lower than average level of SEN. Our private school on the other hand includes multiple children in care and refugees. All classes are represented to some extent, and it is a popular choice amongst trades and farmers in addition to teachers, doctors and lawyers as well as people who don’t seem to have to work at all for a living. There is far more racial diversity, and many are native second language speakers. We also have SEN at higher than average (about 2x national average and 3-4x more than the local state).

our school doesn’t precisely represent the community because it is more diverse than the community. The bit that is missing is the ‘can’t be fucked’ sector of society - all of the children at our school are there because they have adults in their lives that value education and prioritise their children. Being in a place where all children are valued is a sort of bubble, but one that I am happy to live in. I personally grew up in poverty, neglect and abuse and am quite happy to shelter my own children from that experience, not that I remember any of my middle class state school classmates having much to do with those of us on the wrong side of the economic divide.

We're being drawn into a bit of a diversion. Of course, @Goldenbear is at perfect liberty to not like private schools. She's also entitled to judge which school would suit her daughter best.

But there's a difference between not liking something/not choosing it for yourself and vindictively trying to cause harm to people because you don't like that they do choose it.

I'm not into fashion. I think fast fashion is almost always exploitative and also bad for our planet. For both those reasons (admittedly mainly the first), I choose to spend very little of my income on clothes. But I'm not going to push for VAT to be added to children's clothes. I think it would make life worse for some people, would damage an important part of our economy, and wouldn't raise enough money to be worth the negatives.

Only a very vindictive person would leap from 'it's a bit ridiculous to get matching Christmas outfits for the family' to 'make them PAY!'

But that spite, that vindictiveness, is what is happening with VAT on school fees.

That's what I really can't get past.

Very clear post explaining what I meant about diversity @Labraradabrador - thanks.

Sorry to hear you had a difficult childhood, and glad that you are able to give your own children a very different one.

And your school sounds great!

My cleaner sends their DD to a private school - and not on a bursary either. They just work ridiculously long hours to fund it.

So there will be plenty of pupils at private school who are from families where extended family are all chipping in, or parents are spending every penny they can earn - as well as those on bursaries and those who can easily afford the fees.

Are you implying that I am vindictive. I have an opinion that you don't like and I'm vindictive, I think that is really extreme.

In all honesty, I commented broadly on why the Labour party would do this, then given the polls showing Labour leading, it is likely that this will happen. However, yes, they may uturn, I have always voted for the Greens so don't have an agenda either way.

Partly.
However.
Forthose kids that do not get in the selective or grammar schools everyone else is left to what’s left over.

I used to live in an area with both grammars and private schools and all the other states are terrible.
Constantly in special measures, attendance is very poor and bullying and fighting the norm.
I was in A&E a while back and it was full of girls that are in one of these schools after a huge fight.

So in areas without grammars at least there is a wider spread of educational abilities for all schools.
In areas with grammars there isn’t and privates thrive.
the climate in those schools left behind is demoralising for kids and teachers alike.