All Private School Parents Should Get State School Places to Fight Back VAT

[LondonSam]

All Private School Parents Should Get State School Places to Fight Back VAT

@1dayatatime I really don't understand your point at all. The existence of neglectful parents in society has nothing to so with the private vs state debate.

You get neglectful parents who educate their children privately.

Most parents want the best for their child regardless of background.

I live in a mixed area, and in the past taught in primary schools in areas of social deprivation. Most of those parents were very aspirational for their kids.

You get neglectful parents who educate their children privately.

I agree. Maybe in grammar school, all parents care, but in private there are also kids of wealthy tycoons who do not necessarily have time and willingness to look at the educational details of their kids.

@mugboat

"@1dayatatime I really don't understand your point at all. The existence of neglectful parents in society has nothing to so with the private vs state debate.

You get neglectful parents who educate their children privately.

Most parents want the best for their child regardless of background.

I live in a mixed area, and in the past taught in primary schools in areas of social deprivation. Most of those parents were very aspirational for their kids."

Quite simply the private vs state debate is a distraction, it reinforces the message that the system is rigged against those of a poorer background, so a sizeable minority don't see the point in trying especially when their parents didn't or see many of their peers at best doing the same and at worst low level crime. This is especially prevalent amongst the poor white.

White poor boys are amongst the social group least likely to go to university. They feel disenfranchised from society and are easy prey for the likes of say Tommy Robinson. The left then simply dismisses them as thick nationalistic racists without ever trying to tackle the underlying problems and feelings of exclusion from society and hope.

Absolutely there is neglect from some private school parents. But proportionally disruptive childhoods, lack of a secure home and a stable family unit that allows them to focus on their education is more common amongst the poorer sections of society than the wealthy. And where it does occur very wealthy parents can simply write a large cheque and have their children's stability and normality provided by a boarding school. Poorer parents don't have that option.

Finally yes I have seen aspirational parents often the poorer the more aspirational such as migrant families from SE Asia and Nigeria.

@PeachSalad

"I agree. Maybe in grammar school, all parents care, but in private there are also kids of wealthy tycoons who do not necessarily have time and willingness to look at the educational details of their kids."

True but there is a world of difference between a disruptive childhood where the dad is in and out of prison or where the mum is a semi functioning alcoholic where the child is never sure whether they will be fed that night. And a neglectful wealthy tycoon dad who sub contracts his parental responsibility and interest in their child's education to a boarding school because he is too busy with his mistress or where the mum is too focused on the next holiday. And anyway they will try and gain their children's affection (although not their respect) with the latest iPhone etc.

But proportionally there are a lot more dysfunctional poor family households than there are dysfunctional billionaire households.

But proportionally there are a lot more dysfunctional poor family households than there are dysfunctional billionaire households.

How naive. You honestly believe that wealthy people are more balanced, less prone to addiction, and less likely to commit the crime? Seriously? You have no idea.

Where do you think that London Russian mobs send their kids? To state school? Do you really think that drug dealers stand in front of a state Catholic secondary more often than in front of private school where not only kid have pocket money that can afford drugs but also their dads? Do you think that rich people are not alcoholics? Yes they are. They can afford it

Crime is always associated with money,

In state if there are criminals they are petty criminals.

You have no idea how much bribery and money laundering is going on in private schools.

Middle class usually moves in the areas where there are good state schools. I was a child of neurologist and surgeon. Do you think my parents sent me private? No, they send me to a very good state school.

@PeachSalad

OK let me edit this and would you disagree with the statement that :

"But numerically there are a lot more dysfunctional poor family households than there are dysfunctional billionaire households."

Private schools are not filled with billionaires only. Actually those are a minority. Neither a millionaire is immmediately choosing private education. Anybody of us who lives and owns the house in London is a millionaire because it is hard to find a house at a less than a million.
The assumption that the richer the less dysfunctional is as a principle wrong and you probably don't know many very rich people. From my observation it is the very opposite.
I know very very rich mums who are bullimic, who are addicted to plastic operations, shopoholics, cocaine addicts. Their kids spend their early years with nannies and now when they are teens they spend time on wealthy kids youth camps.
Big money corrupts.
The better families in privates are those of expats ( companies pay the fees), military ( government pays school fees), diplomats ( govbof their country pays fees), you will also find a lot of kids e.g Polish or Romanian owners of the building companies, Indian shop chain owners, lawyers etc
This is more of a upper middle class that is hard working. But billionaires less likey for having dysfunctional family? No way
Look even at celebrities and how their life changed shen they became rich in famous: no of divorces, drugs and so on

@PeachSalad

The alcohol harm paradox

"alcoholchange.org.uk/policy/policy-insights/alcohol-and-inequalities"

The correlation between addiction of alcohol, tobacco and drugs to poverty.

www.drugwise.org.uk/is-drug-use-mainly-in-deprived-areas/

You have taken the approach that because yes there are billionaires with drug addictions such as UK then there is no correlation between socio economic status and addiction.

You have also taken the typical liberal left wing approach that because I have pointed out that such problems are more prevalent amongst poorer people that in some way I am bashing or uncaring about the less well off. When the reality is very much the opposite.

Unless there is openness and honesty about both the problems impacting deprived areas and the attitudes/ outlook this generates then the downward spiral of economic inactivity and poor aspirations will continue.

It will simply not work and is detrimental for lower income people to be encouraged by the left to expect the state to fix all their problems, that the system is stacked against them and whatever actions they personally take to change this will not work.

Yes the state can do alot more especially investment in education but equally people in the most deprived areas can do a lot themselves to improve their situation.

Do you honestly think that anybody has access to data on drug use in the mansions of Cobham or Ascot?
Honestly, it is much easier to gather the data from the deprived areas as the addicts live in poverty and are visible in the streets.

And also they consider " areas" like my borough, Richmond upon Thames not deprived but affluent. From the entire borough the very rich live only around Petersham and some parts of Richmond.
The rest is middle class or upper middle class. We have excellent state education here. There are great private schools that have busses bringing kids from miles away as the local kids are tiny minority. Why to pay for private when you have Outstanding state schools with results way above average?
And they compare such middle class areas with highly deprived. They have no idea what is going on behind the Ascot mansions doors.

Enroll a child not in some rural or small town private where richer farmers take their kids to school. Send him to one of the Ascot or Cobham schools. You have really really rich people thete. It will be an eye opener about bribery and substance abuse and most of all sweeping problems by the school under the carpet.

Yes, and those 'better families' are the ones being priced out by VAT.

Yes they are most affected

Shame on Labour!!!

What a ridiculous generalisation!! You clearly have never attended a PS or sent your children to one, otherwise you would know how utterly stupid your assumption is! My children go to a small local PS where the parents are normal upper middle class corporates who work hard and dedicate time to helping their children achieve. The outstanding state school round the corner is mostly filled with children who barely speak English and the number of children with behavioural issues that the school can barely deal with is on the rise. I can say this as I have friends and neighbours whose children go to the school - those who can afford it have moved their children to PS and those who could not are forever complaining and worries about what the situation will be like once their children move to the local comprehensive secondary school.

I live in London, where private schools are filled with children of wealthy immigrants, many of whom speak English as a second language. These children often excel in the 11+ exams and secure places in highly competitive grammar schools, where there are dozens of candidates vying for each spot. South Asian children, in particular, are frequently high achievers and often progress to prestigious universities like Oxbridge. Your narrow-minded views about non-native speakers reveal how limited your perspective truly is.
Wealth does not protect against behavioural issues. Conditions such as autism, ADHD, and other special educational needs (SEN) are distributed by nature across all social classes, affecting both the wealthy in private schools and the less affluent in state schools.
Attending a private school doesn’t necessarily lead to better behaviour or manners, as evidenced by the offensive language in your comments. I am considering reporting this. I sincerely hope that children from your local state school are being taught how to engage in discussions more respectfully than you have demonstrated here. facepalm

what about private nurseries, football clubs, zuma, ballet, gymnastics, language courses? these are profit making businesses that provide education too so should VAT be charged on these? uni fees?

It’s all in the post…mark my words.

The trouble with the politics of envy is that there are many unintended consequences. And those consequences will hit those who can least afford it.

Well, the EU position covered all of those.

Now we have abandoned the principle, then any/all of those could become VAT-able in future. No party plans this at present. But now the public have voted for a government that was explicit in its belief that education is VAT-able, this is much, much easier to change over time.

(See also Labour policies introducing university fees, or introducing private providers to NHS)

There are already noises about charging VAT on private dentistry. And given that it was the last Labour government’s unfavourable NHS dentistry contract that caused the exodus of NHS dentists to start private practices in the first place, I don’t think they will be inclined to stop that either. That leaves precious little chance of anyone who can’t find an NHS dentist avoiding the extra expense.

Charging VAT on dentistry is monstrous.

As is charging VAT on education.

Agreed

Oh I can assure you some private school parents are paying with the express aim of outsourcing all of that!

Probably protest would be more effective.