Proposal that Independent school pupils should pay extra Uni fees

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3359843.stm

This seems like a most unfair proposal to me. While it is certainly debatable as to whether tuition fees should be variable according to parents' wealth at all (people with rich parents are forced to rely on them financially), whether or not someone went to a private school is a ridiculously inaccurate measure of parents' wealth. There are loads of well-off people who remain well-off by sending their children to state schools, whereas some parents whose children go to private schools have to scrimp and save in order to be able to afford it, or use a scholarship scheme. It is essentially designed to undermine independent schools for (IMO stupid) ideological reasons, rather than an attempt to be fair in the charging of fees.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3359843.stm

This seems like a most unfair proposal to me. While it is certainly debatable as to whether tuition fees should be variable according to parents' wealth at all (people with rich parents are forced to rely on them financially), whether or not someone went to a private school is a ridiculously inaccurate measure of parents' wealth. There are loads of well-off people who remain well-off by sending their children to state schools, whereas some parents whose children go to private schools have to scrimp and save in order to be able to afford it, or use a scholarship scheme. It is essentially designed to undermine independent schools for (IMO stupid) ideological reasons, rather than an attempt to be fair in the charging of fees.

Children who go to independent schools should really have to pay, isn't Eton £7,000 a term. They can obviously afford it and University is a nice cheap option. This idea is obviously to prevent parents who will have to struggle to afford independent schools, there are good grammars... so independent school need not be an option. Is this an idea by the labour party (I never read the article), 'cause if it is... I think I may have found the party I 'agree' with... I've been wanting to know for ages.

Usually in these kinds of debates I will always stick up for the people who are less wealthy, often people on benefits. But I thought about it and realised that sometimes those who have little money is because it is self inflicted and these people are sometimes the ones that cause the problems for people like my family who just want a quiet life. A little off the topic.

Back onto the rich paying more subject, I don't think it's fair that peoples parents who have worked hard have to pay more. But then I also don't think it's fair that children who have parents who are on a lower income should have to pay the same amount as those with more money. And I think the latter is the argument I shall stick by. You cannot choose your parents, nor their wealth.

Children who go to independent schools should really have to pay, isn't Eton £7,000 a term. They can obviously afford it and University is a nice cheap option. This idea is obviously to prevent parents who will have to struggle to afford independent schools, there are good grammars... so independent school need not be an option. Is this an idea by the labour party (I never read the article), 'cause if it is... I think I may have found the party I 'agree' with... I've been wanting to know for ages.

"Children who go to independent schools should really have to pay, isn't Eton £7,000 a term. They can obviously afford it........."

Well, yes they obviously can afford it. But, havn't their parents already paid for their kid's university education through their taxes?

"Children who go to independent schools should really have to pay, isn't Eton £7,000 a term. They can obviously afford it........."

Well, yes they obviously can afford it. But, havn't their parents already paid for their kid's university education through their taxes?

But what about people who are only at independent schools because of scholarships/bursaries? Even if they were excluded, it is still a very crude way of assessing parental paying ability, as some parents go without a lot in order to afford school fees, or else save up for years. And independent day schools are "only" around £2k a term, and most areas do not have good grammar schools.

No this isn't a Labour proposal, they're too spineless to propose anything so controversial.

The problem is that not all areas still have grammar schools, they were scrapped in the Manchester in the late 1960's (67 or 68). Trafford (which is on the border of Manchester) have kept them. For this reason my sister goes to a grammar school as there is no way my parents could have afforded an independant.

I think taxing the middle class is wrong, there always need to be people with more money as that is what creates society however I think that the very rich (those than earn more than £100k a year combined for example) should have to pay more to help fund decent education for the less well off such (such as grammar schools).

I am just stuck in the middle here. I can see both sides and both are quite valid. Yes the rich should be taxed but they should not be taxed for working hard.

People also should not suffer just because their parents are poor.

"Well haven't the poorer families already contributed a lot towards their childs university education through their taxes? Sure, it may not be as much but they have"

I agree!

"And anyway the reason why the parents of the Eton students can afford to pay 7k a term is because they were likely to be given better oppertunities than those parents who get less than 7k in 3 months.

I agree again!

Not because they have worked a lot harder"

Maybe, maybe not. I really don't know how much harder on average and(if at all) "rich" folks work than "poorer" folks. I'm sure there are many rich people who have never lifted a finger in their life But, I'm also sure there are other rich people who against all odd slogged their way to where they are.

It's just a fact of life that some folks are either born into better circumstances than others or become wealthy later in life. But, I don't think "sucsess" should be punished.

And I don't see how we can ever level the playing field without some form of socialist redistribution of wealth which isn't my cup of tea.

Howard

I so agree with you too! Like you said it is so hard to tell or discriminate on how hard someone has worked. So I'm not sure about all this.

Thats the problem and its why the government need to stop medeling with things too much.