Search results

State of this.

If only you knew.

If you’re about to suggest that I moved to an area to get my kids into a good school you’d be wrong.

But parents B are paying the price in full, they’re not getting a state subsidy on the costs they’ve put down to ensure their children get a better education. You’re talking about a small percentage of 6% of all children attending school in the UK. And as I’ve already pointed out private...

Further education isn’t private education. It’s not a luxury. It’s also not free at point of use in most of the UK to everyone so technically it already isn’t subsidised.

How are you subsidising parents B? They’re firstly paying a premium on the house price for the location and then paying stamp duty that reflects that premium. If the VAT on private schools gets funnelled directly into state education funding improvements in state education then that’s improving...

Well you are you’re saying what if VAT goes on university fees, what if VAT goes on private healthcare, what if your gran had bollocks… Try reading up on Finlands education system. It’s possible, there just needs to be political will from politicians to propose it and from the electorate to...

Agreed. But that’s not the reality. You’re saying we should subsidise parents A so their child can go to a better school but not subsidise parents B who have also taken action to so their child can go to a better school. Parents B just didn’t go the private education route they moved house...

I think when you get to the point of inventing scenarios where something might happen to prove a point you’d be better off just conceding the point.

But if you buy a 3 bedroom house in Finham or Kenilworth to ensure your kids get a better education you don’t pay stamp duty at the going rate for a 3 bedroom house in Bell Green do you. Your stamp duty is not subsidised for the sake of the standard of your children’s education.

That’s not how subsidies work. It’s a subsidy because the accusation is that if they charge VAT it becomes unaffordable. That’s the very definition of a subsidy. It’s also bollocks. Private schools are not a broken business model. I read the other day that the cost of private education to the...

It’s a tax break on a luxury item. By default that means it’s being subsidised by everyone else. It’s really not that difficult of a concept.

But that’s not the reality with schooling. People using private education are not doing it because their child is going to miss the start of term in state education if they don’t. Fair play to anyone willing to do it just don’t expect everyone else to subsidise the luxury with a tax break.

Of course it is. Socialism for the wealthiest.

Getting required medical attention is a necessity not a luxury. You can froth all you like but private education is a luxury.

By not paying VAT on a luxury.

Or security detail.

Just subside it with a tax break.

Putting a Russian in the House of Lords against the advice of security services whose family also happens to be under sanctions in almost every other western country but us. Then was the tennis match and donations with the wife of one of Putins henchmen. The tories are far more entangled with...

I think the whole country will breathe a sigh of relief with a change of government. There’s already 1 good indicator that things will improve with a change of government in that the markets didn’t soil their pants on the announcement of a GE and the very obvious certainty that there’s a change...