Private schooling

Amy***

I guess it will become my concern when i start paying tax and therefore funding the tax cuts that private schools recieve. Because how could private schools fulfill their 'charity' status if they are only concerned about those 'involved in private education'?

Then you'll even more concerned at the amount in extra taxes you'd have to pay, should private education be banned, in order for those currently in private education to be educated in the state sector; it outweighs the tax breaks many times over.

Reply 21

Bagration

18

Amy***

I guess it will become my concern when i start paying tax and therefore funding the tax cuts that private schools recieve. Because how could private schools fulfill their 'charity' status if they are only concerned about those 'involved in private education'?

Well frankly I agree but corporate tax should be abolished, so, that solves that problem.

Reply 22

Hopping Mad Kangaroo

15

Good bloke

Then you'll even more concerned at the amount in extra taxes you'd have to pay, should private education be banned, in order for those currently in private education to be educated in the state sector; it outweighs the tax breaks many times over.

I think we would make well more than the £2billion back, simply by making sure the best people get into the top universities and then jobs. But if not - £2 billion is a very small price to pay for meritocracy.

Reply 23

hamster33

11

yep, thats what the most enlightened billionaires have done

Reply 24

Good bloke

19

Hopping Mad Kangaroo

But if not - £2 billion is a very small price to pay for meritocracy.

You can pay it then. I'm all for people paying for what they want.

Reply 25

Hopping Mad Kangaroo

15

Good bloke

You can pay it then. I'm all for people paying for what they want.

Sure - on condition that I also get any profit on my investment. You don't mind if I buy some votes whilst at it - do you? After all I would need some funding :wink:

Reply 26

Jason Sparks

12

xobile

Who here thinks that private education is a way for the wealthy to buy privilege for their children?

Wealthy? Most families sending their children to private schools are not necessarily wealthy and are more often than not middle class families who might have remortgaged etc., in order to afford the fees. Also, many students are granted scholarships and have private institutions paying for their fees.

Secondly, privilege!? The only reason private education is considered a privilege is because a good level of education is considered a privilege amidst a failing educational system.

Reply 27

Amy***

7

Good bloke

Then you'll even more concerned at the amount in extra taxes you'd have to pay, should private education be banned, in order for those currently in private education to be educated in the state sector; it outweighs the tax breaks many times over.

I'm not proposing a ban on private education because it would be unrealistic to do so.

Although I wouldn't mind paying a higher rate of tax if the result was a more egalitarian society.

Reply 28

xobile

OP

2

Firstly, private schools are much better than state schools. Go from a state school to a private school and you will know how.

Secondly, the best private schools, certainly those that actually provide a higher quality education than state schools, take students in on the basis of merit. The charity status they get is because they are happy to pay up to 100% of a child's fees if he has talent. My school, a private school, has hundreds of students on scholarship and a considerable number on 100% scholarships. These students are being given an excellent education, not because their parents are rich, but because they deserve it.

Reply 29

running_with_scissors

1

If people have the money, they should spend it how they want. It's a stereotype that people who go to private schools are all snobs etc. etc. Most of their parents have worked hard to afford such schooling and good education is intensely useful so why not? I don't see why some people get so worked up about it - calling it a symbol of upper-class snobbery etc. is taking it a bit far...

Reply 30

dollydaydream

2

I am so glad I wasn't private schooled. I think that most private schools don't set people up for dealing with all kinds of people in the "real world". I have nothing against private schooling but in my area, it makes a real difference. The majority of private schooled kids in my area are so arrogant and put themselves above the rest, it's a real shame.

I'm definately not saying that everyone is like that, it's just my personal view.

I can get the same quality of teaching at my local sixth form college, getting the same grades and not having to pay for it.

Reply 31

one2three_abc

15

fisherman

I think private schools should all lose their charitable status.

Even though private schools contribute to the wider community. My school allows the use of sports facilities for other schools, the campus is used for Kings Camps, some teachers go to primary schools and teach them in a 'fun' way, other teachers have lectures available to people from out of the school, we raise tens of thousands of pounds for charity every year.
Not to mention the fact that parents of privately educated children are paying twice, for their own child and for another child who goes to a state school. They could be greedy and take their guaranteed place at a state school, or go to a grammar school, but instead they vacate the place by going to a private school, which incidently requires the child to obtain better results than in the 11+ test to get in...so it's the clever kids whose parents have enough money or are willing to sacrifice to give their children what is essentially a better education. And the school provides full scholarships for less wealthy people who couldn't afford to pay the school fees but are clever enough to get a place.

At the end of the day private schools provide, on average, a better education, whatever way you spin it. Everyone pays for their education, some people just pay twice.

Reply 32

running_with_scissors

1

It depends on the private school too, but having been private schooled all my life, but being state schooled for 6th from (my own curiousity), I'd have to say that private schools actually prepare you much better for the real world, and provide a better education. The state college I go to is meant to be one of the best/the best in the country, so it is by no means bad, but I'm just stating from personal experience I think private schooling is more effective.
In truth it's mostly a case of using what you have, so it shouldn't really matter too much in the end.

Reply 33

Jason Sparks

12

dollydaydream

I am so glad I wasn't private schooled. I think that most private schools don't set people up for dealing with all kinds of people in the "real world".

This really isn't the case. Any child having lived a remotely sheltered life can find difficulty in social interaction. I personally think that children who board are given the advantage of independence from a very early age, learning discipline and self-respect. Now, if i was against state-schools i might add that this advantage is one contrary to those at state-schools not quite as independent - but we all know that would be overgeneralistic nonsense!

Reply 34

Amy***

7

xobile

The charity status they get is because they are happy to pay up to 100% of a child's fees if he has talent. My school, a private school, has hundreds of students on scholarship and a considerable number on 100% scholarships. These students are being given an excellent education, not because their parents are rich, but because they deserve it.

They are prepared to pay because it is entirely in their interest to do so. Basically 'talented' kids who can't afford to pay, who would otherwise go to their local state school, are taken in by the oh so 'altruistic' private schools so that they can fulfill the needs of their 'charity status' and push up their results. (This kid can then not push up the results of the state school).

The loser here is the state system which teaches anybody regardless of ability, because it is not a system based on self-interest. In some deprived areas many of the talented children are sapped away at secondary school level by the private sector leaving the state sector with those that it is not in the interests of the private schools to teach.

Reply 35

4x4

10

xobile

Who here thinks that private education is a way for the wealthy to buy privilege for their children? me

If you think so, do you think it is wrong for the wealthy to do this? not in this society

Around 7 percent of school pupils are privately educated. Around 40 percent of Oxbridgers are from private schools.

Do you think the government should make universities follow a 'positive discriminatory' policy that is essentially biased against private school pupils? no, they should try to accept the most intelligent people, disregarding previous education

It just shows that state schools should be improved.

Reply 36

1721

14

any discrimination is nagative discrimination

Reply 37

username129099

15

There is nothing wrong with it, however what is annoying is universities expecting the same grades from state school kids as private school kids. There is no where else i can think of where you would expect the same standard, of something which effectively cost anything up to £120,000 less. If i were road testing a Kia and comparing it to an Aston Martin i wouldn't expect anything like the same performance from the Kia. I would say that though.

Reply 38

Hopping Mad Kangaroo

15

4x4

It just shows that state schools should be improved.

Agreed. By closing private and grammar schools :smile:

Reply 39

Amy***

7

one2three_abc

Even though private schools contribute to the wider community. My school allows the use of sports facilities for other schools, the campus is used for Kings Camps, some teachers go to primary schools and teach them in a 'fun' way, other teachers have lectures available to people from out of the school, we raise tens of thousands of pounds for charity every year.
Not to mention the fact that parents of privately educated children are paying twice, for their own child and for another child who goes to a state school. They could be greedy and take their guaranteed place at a state school, or go to a grammar school, but instead they vacate the place by going to a private school, which incidently requires the child to obtain better results than in the 11+ test to get in...so it's the clever kids whose parents have enough money or are willing to sacrifice to give their children what is essentially a better education. And the school provides full scholarships for less wealthy people who couldn't afford to pay the school fees but are clever enough to get a place.

At the end of the day private schools provide, on average, a better education, whatever way you spin it. Everyone pays for their education, some people just pay twice.

If the private sector is really that 'giving' surely it won't mind giving a little bit more? After all if private schools lose their charity status they wont have to waste their time providing (I use the term losely as often state schools have to PAY for the renting of facilities from private schools) for the plebs and can spend its money on better causes e.g. making their pupils even MORE privileged

Private schooling

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you