Private educaiton - is everyone really rich that sends their kids?

[Clare123]

We are fairly wealthy, but I still think education 2 kids privately is so much money! I was wondering how most families do it?!

One way of funding private education is by remortgaging your house. That way you end up paying for it over many years but in managable amounts.

You do of course have to have been lucky in the property market .

'The fact that you are teachers has very little to do with level of wealth too. There are rich teachers and poor ones. Poor ones don't fund their children to private schools.'

You're being silly. Most people, as you have already conceded would not consider any teachers to be 'rich' unless they have come in to some money from some other source other than their salary (i.e. a lottery win or an inheritance).

DP and I are not rich yet we send our children to private school.

I have also pointed out that at my dcs' school the majority of parents would not be considered rich in conventional terms (in fact in dd1's class alone there are 3 single parents - 1 is a driving instructor, 1 is a student, 1 is a lawyer, there is a couple where one parent works in a nursery and the other is an IT technician but both moonlight to be able to afford 3 sets of school fees, there is another couple who are teachers and so on).

In the secondary section of the school 30% of children receive bursaries which are means tested on a sliding scale. To receive a full bursary parents have to have a joint income of less than £20,000 a year. So nobody could call these parents rich or even well. This is common for private schools and in some up to 50% of children receive some sort of bursary.

''Is the implication, then, that 'fate' did 'throw the necessary resources' my way???'

Absolutely! As I said, I have no doubt you worked hard and made wise decisions, but fate plays a massive part in it all. '

What do you mean by this? What part of my life has been determined by 'fate'? And how can you possibly know this?

Those fees don't sound very expensive in that case fivecandles. Certsinly not on the scale of fees arond here.

'You do concede that not everyone has the choices you do, but you do skim over this section of society by caveating them ans suggesting that with the exception of a few, the rest have just badly planned their lives/not worked hard enough. You say a lot of people COULD make different choices, but I happen to not agree. '

Again, you're being silly. I'm not 'skimming over' the people who cannot afford private education at all.

And I don't understand how you can possibly dispute the fact that there are a large number of people who COULD choose private school for their kids but don't. There are some who have said this explicitly on this thread. I work with a large number of people who are in this position too - either out of principle or because they have other financial priorities like a big mortgage or because they are in the catchment of some very good state schools or because they just never considered private education as a possibility, . I am not for a second criticising them. Their money; their choice. My money; my choice.

'It is an over-generalisation that people sit in houses 4 times the value of yours whinging about wishing they could afford private education.'

You are misinterpreting my argument. I happen to know people who say they can't afford private education but DO sit in a house worth 4 times mine. I am not saying that this is GENERALLY true for all people but it is true for some people. That is a fact. And 'whinging' is your choice of word and not mine.

Sounds like CH five candles.

'It is also incredibly naive to suggest that SAHM is actually a choice for a good deal of people.'

You are obviously reading what you want to read and not what I am actually writing. I have written specifically about families where this is a CHOICE. Some families do choose to have one partner at home rather than earning where they could make a different choice. Once again, I am not criticising this choice. It is a statement of fact that I have made a different choice. If I had stayed at home for a significant period of time after having my children I could not have afforded to send them to private school. This is no more and no less than a fact.

'I do believe these people who you speak of exist,'

Then why the hell are you arguing with me?

'I just don't think they are as significant in number as you appear to.'

But I've never put a number on it. I'm not suggesting for a second that there are millions of people out there who have these options but there are some. A significant number. That's all.

I do get the feeling that you're arguing for the sake of it. And if you're so bitter about private education perhaps this is not the best choice of thread for you.

Starlight, you make a huge stream of assumptions about me, my upbringing and my education. I'm absolutely astounded that you feel able to do this based on what I have revealed about my circumstances today.

I'd like to know exactly where I have made false assumptions? Says the woman who has just written this about me:

'You were born in a wealthy country for a start (or a poor one but enough wealth to get out). You were born with enough intelligence to get a degree. You were lucky enough to go to a school where you weren't frightened to attend lessons. You were lucky enough to be born to parents who cared about you enough to ensure you could thrive. You had support of some kind at university. You don't have a family member that requires you to give up work to be a full-time carer. You grew up in an environment where you felt safe enough to make your own decisions. You had the training required to understand at an early age that decisions can impact on the rest of your life.

And you probably worked hard, made wise choices, have good morals yadda yadda yadda.....'

My God...

Right, so you're slagging off me and my choices and yet you have chosen private education for your own son. You are a pure hypocrite in that case.

Starlight, further down the thread you wrote, 'OP Of course you have to be rich'.

Do you stand by this?

Starlight, way back in the thread I said this:

'It's funny cos I'm always amazed by how many households can afford a SAHM by choice. If that SAHM or SAHD even part-time on the minimum wage went back to work she or he could make enough money for school fees. As other posters have said my salary pretty much goes on the school fees (for 2) and dp pays pretty much the rest. We're teachers so not rich but comfortable compared to many but we've both always worked. So, while I appreciate that there are many who could never afford the fees I do believe there are many who could but make other choices such as SAHM or bigger mortgage or whatever. Not criticising those choices by the way but we've chosen private education over them.'

I've put the bits in bold that you obviously didn't see or chose to ignore but I have repeated these phrases throughout.

I'm really not sure what you two are arguing about. Fivecandles - you've said that many (most?) people are not in a position to pay for school fees because their income is simply too low, which is surely what Sarlight is saying. So I don't see the point of comparing your position with that of others of similar income to you who make different choices. REally it comes down to a definition of 'rich' doesn;t it? As Hulababy says below, one person;s 'rich' is another person's 'well off' or 'comfortable'. There are no absolute values on these definitions.

Right, so my friend the single parent driving instructor will be delighted to know she's now 'rich', as will the couple whose dd is in my dd2's class who have been living with their in laws for over a year so they can afford school fees. The nurses, midwives and the couple I mentioned where the husband is an IT technician and the wife a nursery worker but they both moonlight will be thrilled by this.

I'm over the moon to discover dp and I are now rich simply because we send our kids to private school.

Sorry, who is making assumptions here?

And please don't dismiss the bursaries. As I've said up to 30% of children in the independent sector receive one. That's a really huge number.

What hasn't been mentioned on this thread is that some private schools are more exclusive than others and to not be rich at such a school would put you in a very small minority. I have friends who would be considered well off but who have felt like the underdog because the rest of their classmates were from substantially wealthier families.

Being able to afford to send your child to a school like this would be about more than just being able to afford the fees.

'fivecandles There are a huge number of people in the world that want what you have, and no amount of toil, planning or good decisions will bring them even half-way.'

I find this incredibly patronising.

Once again, I HAVE ACKNOWLEDGED THIS MANY TIMES. I do and always have recognized that I am truly fortunate.

What do you want me to do about it?
Are you suggesting that I should take my kids out of private school because it's not fair that I should be so lucky? What IS your problem exactly?