Whitehall “braced for private schools collapse” 5

[ICouldBeVioletSky]

Starting a continuation thread in anticipation of the fourth one filling up…

www.mumsnet.com/talk/education/5301690-whitehall-braced-for-private-schools-collapse-4?page=39

I am perfectly capable of holding several concepts in my mind at the same time so need for insults.

We are not talking about SEN and I thought I had made that clear in my post. There are also many people who don't have access to a good state option so let's be clear on that too. We were talking about other circumstances.

I was simply clarifying whether, even if you had excellent state schools on your doorstep, you would still choose private schooling. You clearly would, no matter how great the state provision. Entirely your prerogative and I don't care at all how you choose to spend your money either. However, it somewhat takes the wind out of sails of indignant posturing that excellent state schools are purely the domain of the wealthy and privileged. What does that matter if are not deemed to be good enough for some DC. In these circumstances, it is hard to see that private education route choice as anything other than choosing the luxury option.

DH and I each pay more tax than 99% of people in the country so wort considering the extent of net contribution before getting too hung up on us taking the state education that we were entitled to. If you choose not to take it, that's your choice too.

I'm not sure I would have the ability to make it work. Friend isn't a teacher but is extremely bright and capable and child is the kind who is perfect in every way for this kind of route.

May never have been to a "normal" school but I suspect will be one of the best educated children in the UK. Child isn't one of these ones who is only interested in astrophysics and maths like a lot of home-ed kids so it's even more complicated.

It is a huge commitment to find, book and coordinate all the teachers, and ensure that all the non-academics are covered, and social activities with peer group.

It's interesting contrasting it with private and state schools.

I'm not confident that I would be able to do it justice either @ohcrumbswherenow but from what you describe, it sounds like your friend is giving her DC an amazing education. Her DC will benefit from that all their life.

If you include the opportunity cost of her not working then it's almost certainly much more expensive than a private education (unless she wouldn't work anyway) but I can think of no better way to invest her energy and time. I would love to feel able to do that too.

And once again @KendricksGin different parents have different opinions and concerns.

I don't 'posture' about state schools being the preserve of the wealthy and privileged. (Although I do point out the hypocrisy of attacking private schools for 'inequality', when there is greater inequality within the state system: which the government is actually responsible for).

It's those pp who aren't able to access good state schools for their DC with SEN who have raised that complaint. They've pointed out the injustice of a system where because they are denied their £8k subsidy due to the DC's SEN, they are additionally expected to pay even more to subsidise families like yours who are wealthier than them.

Different people, different situations, different concerns.

(I obviously have empathy for those different situations and concerns, and consider them valid)

But haven't you said that you want to see bursaries withdrawn and use of facilities revoked as private schools have been far too generous for far too long? So that empathy doesn't seem to extend to all DC in all situations.

Of course it doesn’t. It's a bit strange to expect empathy to be endless and apply to all situations. That would suggest rather a lack of thought.

Let alone actual funding. Do you duplicate every gift to your own DC to another random 15 kids in addition? Every item of clothing, every book, every holiday (every privilege)? No, I thought not.

Actually, I don't really care if you're Saint Teresa and you do take 15 kids on holiday with you, and don't mind when they deliberately break your things. I don't want to fund sharing facilities with state schools. Not any more. For bursaries, my viewpoint is more nuanced (but irrelevant to this point).

Who I'm saying I have empathy for are the pp on this thread and others who are harmed by this policy and whose situation and viewpoint are different to mine. They've explained that parents with access to a good state school are more privileged than they are, since they were denied that. Yet they're still expected to subsidise those richer families even more on top.

Their argument is different to mine because of their different personal situation. It's not my argument to make, but it seems valid. So I empathise.

It's not complicated. Did you genuinely misunderstand me, or are you just trying to twist my words?

You didn't pay VAT on the children's clothes, books and holidays you gave your kids.

There weren't even tax-payer-subsidised holidays for those other kids to go on (contributing to those as a tax payer would have been something). No subsidy you forfeited.

Yet you gave nothing to make up for giving those privileges to your own. And you felt no obligation to give any of those things to other kids. Just income tax, which everyone pays. Progressively more as you earn more. Same as everyone else. The usual way we do income distribution. Maybe a bit of personal charitable giving as you chose.

Expecting anything at all from private school parents on top of the taxes they pay is inconsistent and unreasonable. When you add in the £8k per year they save the state, it's laughable.

@strawberrybubblegum thanks for your understanding and support.

You know absolutely nothing of what I have given to 'make up for my privileges'. Not a clue. Your posts get more ridiculous the angrier you get.

And you get angrier the more your irrational entitlement is exposed.

Of course I don't know how much you gave. Which is why I mentioned 'Maybe a bit of personal charitable giving as you chose'.

Did you really donate an extra £8k for each of your DC per year voluntarily throughout their education? Ie more than a private school parent is giving (even without their additional charitable giving)

Even if you did (which would be unusual) there's a difference between giving extra by choice and the extra being demanded with an undercurrent of entitlement, contempt and destructive intent from the people receiving it.

I have nothing at all to be angry about. Quite the contrary.

The irrational entitlement appears to be all yours. The £8k per annum which every child is entitled to is allocated on a 'use it or lose it' basis. You chose to lose it. That's all there is to it. Every tax payer contributes in the same way, even people who don't have children at all. I don't hear them complaining about it. If you don't like this, you could always leave the country.

You are right that you don't know how much I contribute and it therefore bonkers to be trying to attack on that.

Or @strawberrybubblegum doesn't have to leave but vote differently and the policy can be dropped.

What with one vote? In four years time?

Yep four years is likely it unless Labour implode earlier.

Sadly four years of damage to education and unnecessary impact on dc but I'll take it being overturned when Labour are out.

ETA they are going downhill so obviously the more votes against the better.

You're so literal @KendricksGin . It isn't only one vote. I may be the only person talking to you about it, but many, many people are quietly changing their employment/tax-paying behaviour, their engagement and their voting choices.

As for the £8k government education subsidy being use-it-or-lose-it, sure. But it's you who is being irrationally entitled to suggest that because we forfeit a subsidy, that means we should pay even more (than those taking that subsidy) on top. That is truly through-the-looking glass logic. Or just unbelievably entitled.

Fervently hoping they implode asap. Moronic in every area so far.

I have just worked out that I have not claimed £192,000 I could have claimed for my kids education so far for my 3. Hope it got spent wisely!! 😜

Literal is good when there is a tendency to get carried away.

The majority of people who will be casting their vote in four years time will not be doing so with VAT on school fees as the main driver. If we take a snapshot view, Labour look likely to do badly but that is for a multitude of reasons.

For the people who are very high net contributors i.e. the ones who who are supposedly going to stop contributing so much tax, attitudes may shift and people may be annoyed but I doubt very much that behaviour will. I don't think many will leave the country permanently purely because of VAT on school fees. People were already maxing their pension contributions, planning for university etc. before the VAT came in.They are not suddenly going to jack in work and home school their DC or go part time and damage their high incomes in a fit of pique. It's just not an option in most senior jobs and many are not the type of people who would want to.

I think you need to make the distinction between 'entitled' in its original meaning and 'irrationally entitled'. For example , like everyone else (including me) you were entitled to the £8k for your DC if state education had been considered good enough but you chose not to take that up. It is irrationally entitled to think that you have the right to cash that in. This is separate from the imposition of VAT on school fees, which I don't agree with (remember). Some countries have a voucher system. The UK doesn't and this is not a new thing.

No one has claimed VAT will be the reason Labour lose.

There are plenty of other reasons they are losing so much support.

Labour are pushing people into state education and cash in hand tutoring on the side. That is now the established model, post Labour’s VAT. Like it or not, call a spade a spade! And let’s not forget that widespread tutoring increasing more and more is a fantastic option for many former state school teachers who have been bashed too hard by red tape, by successive Governments.
I cannot be the only one who knows lots of former teachers doing just that or doing a work part time, top up with tutoring model either.

I already didn't vote for them locally, where I otherwise would have done. To keep ignoring the huge losses at local elections and that they show what people think of Labour to date is surely wilful ignorance? Years ago I posted on a chat/political thread that I wanted to stand up for women's rights against the trans rage that was filtering in and I got told that it wasn't something the Labour supporters here even discussed because it ruffled someone's feathers. You bury your heads in the sand when tough topics come up and can't see the main issues the country worries about instead. Champagne socialists have clearly taken over again and the country can see it.

But correctly you are not saying VAT is the sole catalyst. Models of behaviour usually take some time to develop, even more to become established. VAT has been in place since January. Cost of living crisis, economic uncertainty, concerns about job losses are other factors to name a few. There is a much bigger picture here isn't there.

@kendricksgin As I already said it is irrationally entitled to think that people who are making a choice which saves the taxpayer money have as a result of that pro-social choice a moral obligation to contribute more, eg sharing access to sports facilities they are personally funding with people who are not funding it; sending teachers they are funding to teach children whose parents are not funding those teachers; inviting children to events which their parents are not funding.

The charity commission may imposing obligations, but it is unethical and entitled. Those people who say that private schools 'should' perform public good are irrationally entitled.

It's bad law. And laws aren't fixed, as we've seen. Neither is generous practice. I think the time of private parents funding the 'excellent work' @curlewkate mentioned is well and truly over.

You're deluded if you think people won't change behaviour. And you're not seeing the wood for the trees when you say it's not just VAT.

It doesn't really matter that it's not just VAT. Labour have caused serious harm to the country. Exactly how much of that harm was avoidable is immaterial.

That’s the point the majority of us have been making all along. It’s not “just” the 20% VAT. It’s cost of living, interest rates, inflation etc on top of that. The VAT is the final straw for many people. Everyone has a tipping point. 20% will push many families over the edge of being able to afford it. Those who think that a 20% price hike won’t change behaviour are deluded.