Crosswords0 min ago
Labour Intends To Add 20% Vat To Private School Fees ...
... which will put private schooling out of reach of many parents, resulting in an added burden to the already over-crowded classrooms in state schools. Similarly, they say they are against private health care which also alleviates the burden on the State system. Nevertheless, Mr Starmer would rather his loved ones suffer than use it. So the question is when 'going private' means that people take responsibility for themselves it follows that the State has less to cope with, so what's so bad about it?
Answers
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.Jesus wept, the naivety of sandyRoe and hymie is so astonishing it actually shocks me.
My wife needs an operation in her ear, she was referred by our GP on Weds just gone, had an appointment at a Nuffield yesterday, and will be having it done next Thursday - of course this is all private.
Her procedure on the NHS....anywhere between 9 and 18 months.
Don't you clowns realise she's freeing up an NHS slot?
Not all people who educate their kids privately are rich and successful (obviously they are more so than you two otherwise you wouldn't be playing the politics of envy) many of them scrimp and save and forgo other things - I know a few.
The few I know have all said an increase in the fees by a fifth will make it unaffordable, so guess what (a) their kids will need to go to a state school adding a burden to an already overburdened system and (b) this could send private schools under resulting in the tax paying staff relying on the state.
You type of people really really get right on my tits.
6.10pm - of course she's jumping the queue, because we have the wherewithal to do so.
What is wrong with that?
Unlike SKS I'm not going to allow a loved one to endure over a year of pain (by the way SKS lied) for ideological reasons when we (like SKS - but nowhere as much as him) have the means to swiftly alleviate the pain.
The point is that there are already people who would like to pay lots of money to pay for private education, and could pay almost enough right now, but not quite. If the tax is added, there will be a few people who can pay now who won't pay in future, and they will be no worse off than those who can't pay now. And then there are those who can pay now who will still be able to pay even with VAT added. So this is not an issue of principle, it's just an issue of cost ... and some unfortunate people will become in the same situation as lots of other people who can't afford it.
I am a Labour supporter and personally I don't have a problem with private education.
What I object to is the strings that private schools pull when the exam results aren't what the parents expect. There are many links available outlining this, and here are a couple:
https:/
I do think that VAT should be added to private school fees and the money used to provide better education in state schools.
All children, regardless of their background should be given the greatest opportunities in life.
> The rich, I would imagine, won't care about the VAT. The 'normals' may no longer be able to afford it.
That's true. They will become like the normals who can't pay it already. It's similar to people who are used to paying business class, who can't afford to any more for some reason.
> Why have Labour throughout their history ALWAYS hated aspiration.
Well, I'm no Labour supporter, but I would imagine they are more concerned about the aspiration for all, rather than a thin band who can only just afford private tuition at present ...
this is all about socialist ideology and not economic pragmatism - all should have equal opportunity and all that - not that it will kill the hotbeds of intelligence, investment into the future, leadership and all that - or that the Stats Office have already indicated that it won't make the anticpated billions, kill foreign relationships and put a burden on Field Warmer to fund £7-8k per student in a drastically over-crowded state system, one that the private sector already takes a healthy number of kids from the state and encourages teacher and principal exchanges - wit Richard Smyth from St Peter's York to Preston.
Let's have a chorus of the Red Flag.
depending on how old you are, hymie, there have beeide n a number of major scholarships out there for your profile....and before you comment about being victimised from coming from the wrong side of the economic railtracks, certainly at my school in N. England, any such behaviour would have been seriously dumped on. Indeed, it was the rich who got the gip for excessive show - we had one of the Slaters of Slater-Walker at the school and he left for the summer break by chopper landing on the hallowed cricket pitch and he walked back into a right maelstrom at the start of the next term.
But you are (probably wilfully) missing the point Hymie.
Not everybody who sends their kids to private school is wealthy. Some of them sacrifice a lot to do so. Do you think 'average' earners who choose to spend whatever money they have on private education shouldn't be allowed to do so?
Do you think my wife should endure pain for a year to wait for an operation rather than us having the means to get it done next week?
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.