"mum you clearly have very little knowledge of the state system outside your own little bubble of good options. How many failing sink schools do you know very well?"
?
And your point is?
The highest percentage of children in private schools in the UK is in London, where there is also the highest percentage of OFSTED 'outstanding' state schools.
The bottom line is this: even in an outstanding state school, the 'spend' per head is about half that spent on children in the private sector.
As for selection in non-religious, supposedly non-selective state schools - this is wheeled out over and over again as being equally discriminatory against disadvantaged children as the private sector, which selects on the basis of parental income, ability, or both. My answer to that is 'utter bollocks'. The school my dc's go to is massively oversubscribed and has many middle-class and high achieving children. But it also has large numbers of children from the MOST disadvantaged backgrounds, including very low achieving children. There is absolutely NO private school in the UK which accepts poor, low achieving children. They are entirely excluded from the system (except in the rare case of SN where a poor and low achieving child has their fees paid for by the LA).
In any case, unfairness and discrimination in one sector, doesn't justify even more unfairness and worse discrimination in another, and mine is just one of many voices calling out for a reform of the admissions process to reduce the unfairness caused by selection by faith, postcode and the 11+
"It is also ironic that both you andmini posted on that thread and are likely to send your dc to better schools than some of your neighbours because you can afford 11+ tuition or music lessons."
11+ tuition is a huge industry where I live, because of the existence of a number of super selectives in a neighbouring borough. Prep schools also abound, and these super-selectives take in disproportionate numbers of children who've been privately educated prior to sitting the 11+. You won't find me defending this as fair and equitable.
As regards selecting on the basis of music - yes there are a number of schools who do this and both of mine (hopefully, just waiting to find out about number 2) have gained a place through this system of partial selection. It's probably not worth pointing this out because it tends to be ignored as it doesn't fit the argument, but many children apply for and gain music places at my dc's school without having had ANY prior formal instrumental teaching. Of course children who are talented on an instrument have a good chance of gaining a place, and it's very wrong that many are excluded from this type of learning by a lack provision in state primaries. Perhaps if the private sector wasn't hoovering up the vast majority of children who are very accomplished on an instrument, state schools would have more of a rationale, and more parental support for improving music provision, but at the moment it's very low down on their list of priorities.