Play date with mum who agrees with education tax

[BonnuitMy]

Please let me know if I’m overreacting. I recently overheard a new mum at school talking about a local private school closing down due to the education tax and how this is somehow a good thing. She’s now invited my DD for a play date, would you accept?

@blossomtoes - forces families make different decisions. Most I know keep their kids with them at younger ages but are quite happy for them to board for Sixth Form in the UK and some are happy with boarding Years 9-11, if the child is ready to do it and many will plan their careers around the education of their children as well. And yes, sometimes the mother will be home in the educationally critical years.
However, the huge majority of people will not be disrupting their kids during GCSE years 9-11. It is not in their interest to do. Disruption at transition points is a completely different kettle of fish.

It’s only for boarders. Most parents don’t want to send their children away to school - regardless of whether it’s taxpayer funded.

In any case it’s a red herring, changing schools isn’t fundamentally damaging to the vast majority of children.

The foreign office have always had something similar. Have you looked at the amounts? Its a nice subsidy for those at the top end of military and FO salaries who also have family money or married to family money or the rare as hen’s teeth high earning spouse who can follow.

If it were truly about concern for educational disruption for forces children it would be sufficient for the average squaddie to use, not a job perk for those who can already afford private fees.

No concerns about state schools closing, the effect on their pupils, staff and the surrounding schools then 🤔

OK so now you are going for top end forces families as well? And diplomatic services?
You know those actually preventing WW3.
I think I have heard it all now.
The green-eyed monster is truly alive and kicking.

@TopPocketFind - I am really concerned about state schools closing. I think they should actually be getting rid of some of the bulge classes in bigger schools that were introduced and diverting kids to smaller schools because I think 2 form entry at primary is the sweet spot. But others disagree.
I also do not like the huge model of secondaries.
However, because the Government seems to want to save money on kids and Education constantly there appears no political will to save smaller state schools either. They are businesses too clearly, have to recruit their pupils and if they can’t, tough.
It is completely unacceptable to view education as a business rather than as a social good and investment in the next generation.
The reason they went for this VAT in the first place is a nice little distraction to what they are doing to state education and probably unis further down the line.

They are businesses too clearly, have to recruit their pupils and if they can’t, tough.

Right, unless it is a private school.

@TopPocketFind - is it the price of the illusion of choice?

Are taxes overall actually funding Governments these days or are they a form of control of the population? (As opposed to funding via central banks?)

I honestly wholeheartedly believe that if state schools and SEND were properly funded and staffed in this country, across the board, so that all schools were of a certain standard and bringing out the best in each and every pupil, on the whole, then we would not be having any of these conversations and there would not be any of this Angst around educational matters and so much competition. And the private sector would not be getting the blame for the failings in the state sector.

Fund education properly, what a novel idea.

Is it ok to scapegoat the private education sector and in particular, the weakest in that sector, for mass failure to fund state education properly?

So is it or is it not?

I am still waiting for an answer to my questions on why no other countries applies VAT to private schools, why it backfired massively in Greece, and why what hasn't worked elsewhere should work in the UK.
The silence is deafening!

Come on, justice warriors, none of you can think of an answer???

You have an odd notion of scapegoat

Brexit bonus, just don't tell Farage or Badenoch

You think the consequences when Greece introduced VAT on private schools - school closures, job losses for teachers, overcrowding in state scools and the policy costing taxpayers more than the revenue generated - were only because Greece was in the EU?

Could you possibly explain the mechanism?

And explain why that same mechanism - and the same consequences - wouldn't happen in the UK due to it not being in the EU

Greece is a different country with a different education system.

The UK state system is not overwhelmed, there is no PS exodus.

Can you explain what differences between Greece and the UK would make the policy work in the UK?

Can you explain why no other country does it?

What would be so unique about the UK that this would be the only country where this would work?

Why are we not taxing universities, too?

If the policy causes a loss in revenue, would you admit the mistake and welcome a u-turn?

Before we were told that Boris Johnson, Cameron and Sunak etc went to elite private schools and did not care about state education as a direct consequence of that.

Yet now we supposedly have the most STATE EDUCATED cabinet and Reeves and Phillipson go on and on about their state educaiton, yet where the hell is the extra funding for state education? Where is it?

The UK state education system is most definitely overwhelmed with underfunded SEND kids and lots of teens with mental health issues and teachers leaving due to stress!

We get it, you don't want to pay more after years of fee rises.

PS school is a choice

Why has the funding per state school child not increased substantially over years to take into account the Covid impact properly, NI changes, societal challenges?
Surely if PS went up in cost, the state should have gone up?

So you think it is in children’s interest to destroy the sector for a few so that those in charge can continue the narrative to keep costs down for the young and keep investment in the next generation at a minimum - so they can keep funding the voters in the elderly demographic? Who is more vulnerable here? The teens with mental health issues and the SEND kids or some of the noisy rich pensioners everyone keeps pandering too?

And obviously the focus is on the government who have surcharged 20%, rather the schools who have jacked fees up 50%+ over inflation the past few years. Stockholm syndrome, sunk cost fallacy or a combination of the two? Don't need a Psychology A-level to work that out.

If that is true though and the Government intervention is just a tipping point, then the outcome surely will be even worse than Greece?

This policy will cause a net loss to the taxpayer and proponents will simply be trying to blame the victims.

The focus is on the government who have surcharged 20%, which will be entirely swallowed up in increased state costs for the students moving into state - leaving everyone worse off, and with no one at all benefitting.

Rather than the schools who have increased fees to pay for increased costs, increased contributions for teacher pensions, and continuing improvement to what they provide our children. Ie actual benefit.

The only thing that takes some psychology to figure out is why we still care about the consequences on the rest of the population: the inevitable worsening of state schools due to resources being stretched between more children, and the inevitable extra taxes to make up for the loss incurred to the state by this policy. With the way the government's language stirs up hatred against us - and 93% on here agreeing - I'm not sure. For me, it's still just the sheer stupidity and waste of it.