Schooliform

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

BoldonLad

Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
Location
South Tyneside
And yet the removal doesn't penalise the wealthy as Labour intends it to. The wealthy just sell a painting or a car, or a few shares.
It penalises those who have sacrificed to get their kids a decent education where mainstream school would have failed them. The kids with anxiety, with medical conditions, with autism etc.

Until they can actually put in place a decent education system, the people being penalised are the children.

As has been pointed out so often, previously, doesn't that rather depend on who is considered to be "wealthy"?
 
As has been pointed out so often, previously, doesn't that rather depend on who is considered to be "wealthy"?

You're right, we've been here before. I've said that £100,000 p.a. is definitely wealthy, and therefore a reasonable starting point, and you have said most of your mates are on that, without proposing a different measure.

How that maps to private school subsidies and fair treatment is linked but not entirely the same discussion.
 

BoldonLad

Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
Location
South Tyneside
You're right, we've been here before. I've said that £100,000 p.a. is definitely wealthy, and therefore a reasonable starting point, and you have said most of your mates are on that, without proposing a different measure.

How that maps to private school subsidies and fair treatment is linked but not entirely the same discussion.

It maps to @icowden 's post, which was rather the point of using the "reply" button.

@icowden's post said "doesn't penalise the wealthy, as Labour intends it to".

I even bolded that that part in my reply, just to make it easy to see which part I was responding to, my point being that, perhaps, Labour do regard that section of the population as "wealthy".

I was not making any comment on private school subsidies and fair treatment.

Since the post was in a thread relating to School Uniform, it appeared to me that the discussion of Labour's plans on VAT were somewhat off topic in any case, as would be Subsidies and fair treatment.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
icowden

icowden

Legendary Member
I even bolded that that part in my reply, just to make it easy to see which part I was responding to, my point being that, perhaps, Labour do regard that section of the population as "wealthy"..
And this is why they fail to win a majority in election after election. This dogged determination that the whole country has the same income level and cost of living. The vast majority of voters are in the middle. Not far left salt of the earth traditional labour nor the far right Mussolini / Hitler types that the Conservatives currently seem to think exist.

Thus anyone who has a decent income but is not wealthy enough that cash is a secondary concern will not vote for Labour. This is why Labour do badly in Surrey.

As I have said before, if you want to close Private schools, make state schools good enough that no-one really wants to pay for private schools. It worked for Finland.
 

BoldonLad

Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
Location
South Tyneside
And this is why they fail to win a majority in election after election. This dogged determination that the whole country has the same income level and cost of living. The vast majority of voters are in the middle. Not far left salt of the earth traditional labour nor the far right Mussolini / Hitler types that the Conservatives currently seem to think exist.

Thus anyone who has a decent income but is not wealthy enough that cash is a secondary concern will not vote for Labour. This is why Labour do badly in Surrey.

As I have said before, if you want to close Private schools, make state schools good enough that no-one really wants to pay for private schools. It worked for Finland.

Well, as the saying goes “turkeys don’t vote for Christmas” ;)
 
OP
OP
icowden

icowden

Legendary Member
Keep your private schools if you really must segregate your kids from the 94%. Stop your privileged whining when your fees are taxed like any other luxury purchase.
Just tell the kids to get over it and they are doomed to failure in the local comp just like my nephew.

I get it.
 
@icowden's post said "doesn't penalise the wealthy, as Labour intends it to".

I even bolded that that part in my reply, just to make it easy to see which part I was responding to, my point being that, perhaps, Labour do regard that section of the population as "wealthy".

Equitable treatment is not a penalty.
 
Just tell the kids to get over it and they are doomed to failure in the local comp just like my nephew.

I get it.

A child is not doomed to failure just because they go to a state school. Yes some are bad, or some are't bad but the child does badly there. There is the option to move if spaces allow. I don't think private schooling automatically means better. Grades-wise, maybe, but it's the person who comes out the other end who matters, not so much the grades
 
OP
OP
icowden

icowden

Legendary Member
A child is not doomed to failure just because they go to a state school. Yes some are bad, or some are't bad but the child does badly there.
My nephew is Autistic. He left state school with 1 A level and a few GCSEs. My sister is in no doubt that had she sent him to a private fee paying school he would have done much better and probably not now be working at the till at the local garage. My niece is also autistic and is thriving in a fee paying school where she has the benefit of small classes with the extra care and attention that can be provided.

Unless you are very lucky, state schools do not cater well for those with additional needs.
 
ok I agree, but state schools are becoming increasingly better at dealing with additional needs. My partner's son is autistic and had a lot of support from his final school (he moved twice), he left with no GCSEs but that wasn't the schools fault, he ripped up an exam papaer wand walked out of a few, and failed to attend the rest, but that was down to other issues. he was given his own room to take the exams
 

Julia9054

Regular
Many private schools don’t cater well for those who are not academically gifted enough to pass an entrance exam. This includes many children with special needs. As the proportion of pupils with special needs are generally lower than in a state school, there are relatively fewer staff with specialist skills and training.
 

multitool

Guest
Screenshot_20231011_211738_Samsung Internet.jpg


Lol. Not even all the wealthy parents would feel sympathy for each other :laugh:
 
Top Bottom