How LARGE will Cameron's failure be ?

[Tooting Gull]

I love your comment about motivated and pro-education parents starting a virtuous circle. Do you know how patronising that sounds?

That is very over-sensitive. It's pure logic and common sense. The bottom line is you either do believe in a second, elitist education avenue for rich parents, or you don't. I don't, you do. All the rest is finding justification for your argument.

I wouldn't expect anyone in or considering private education to agree with what I posted. History shows if you're benefiting from an unfair system, you'll cling on to it. And as I said, policies like this might (and others in other areas) make it easier for people to make their minds up. It is probable that in Sussex, and even on this board, those supporting private education are over-represented on a national scale.

And on your point about what it would cost to put those currently educated privately through the state system (and in my view it would be money well spent anyway) the chief exec of the Independent Schools has claimed that his schools are making the poor less poor because of the tax he is saving them. How good of him. Now THAT is patronising. Cutting their kids adrift, but all for their own good. Twat.

 

[Buzzer]

That is very over-sensitive. It's pure logic and common sense. The bottom line is you either do believe in a second, elitist education avenue for rich parents, or you don't. I don't, you do. All the rest is finding justification for your argument.

Incorrect. I never said that I did or did not believe that there ought to be private education. I don't particularly have strong views on the subject. I was merely pointing out that your claim that they cost the "ordinary" taxpayer seems (to me) to be wrong.

 

[User removed 4]

For every genuine single mother who struggles to cope with day to finances and work i'm afraid there are many more children breeders and they are the ones the BOF and Harty are on about, I liken it to the amount of people now who bread dogs, it's not a real interest to them it's a cash thing.

Absolutely spot on , there are untold children breeders both male and female in my extended family, i know i'll get snide 'chav family ' comments from people on here who wouldnt dream of it if i wasnt white, but ive seen it from personal experience,sure there are single mothers who are that way because a genuine relationship has broken down, my ex wife is one , but i contribute both financially and emotionally to my kids upbringing , there are 16 year old children i know with two kids to their name , who literally do not understand the concept of supporting themselves, 'the governments got loadsamoney' is the normal response, i suppose these fuckwits are to be pitied really becaus ethey genuinely dont understand where the 'government' gets its money from, and unless there is root and branch reform of our welfare system a la frank field's ' think the unthinkable' it's only going to get worse.

 

[Acker79]

I think Labour will win it but by a whisker and I would b ehappy with that. Labour need a massive slap in the fact but Cameron has not convinced me at all that he could be better of the UK.

I don't think winning the election, however close, given current sentiment, and dissatisfaction with the economy, immigration, crime, MP expenses etc. (even if it is media hyperbole) would be taken as a slap in the face by labour, more of a "we can get away with it!"*

*Not meant as an attack on Labour, if we were in a conservative government and all the complaints were against them, they would take an election victory the same way, etc. This isn't about political leanings, it's about how the party will take the election win as a message

 

[binky]

The bottom line is you either do believe in a second, elitist education avenue for rich parents, or you don't.

This is a gross oversimplifaction of a complex issue.
I know you believe it is all about dogma. All of your points are about "fairness" and "equality".
However, I am outraged that I have to spend extra to ensure my kids are educated well. I would far prefer to take advantage of the schools my taxes have helped to build and run, however, after long and hard evaluation, I'm afraid I find them wanting.
I would be delighted for the private school at which my children are educated were to lose it's chairitable status. The degree of interference this results in from government far outweighs the minor financial benefit accrued.

I'm not rich, yes, I earn more than average, but after tax and the school fees are paid, my household income is below the point at which it would qualify for benefits to "save me from poverty".
We are a one car family where that is a 10 year old second hand banger, we haven't taken a foreign holiday in years, my clothes are second hand, everything is make do and mend.

I have no confidence that inserting my children into the local comprehensive will have any effect whatsover on that schools infrastructure or results. My presence as a parent will not miraculously make other parents more "education focused".
All that will happen is that I'll be able to afford a better car, and perhaps go skiing... and my children will not get the advantages they deserve.

Just because ALL children cant have an equally good education, doesn't mean that MY children should be deprived of one if I am willing to make sacrifices to achieve it.

And on your point about what it would cost to put those currently educated privately through the state system (and in my view it would be money well spent anyway) the chief exec of the Independent Schools has claimed that his schools are making the poor less poor because of the tax he is saving them. How good of him. Now THAT is patronising. Cutting their kids adrift, but all for their own good. Twat.

I don't know what the exact numbers are, but I'm sure that increasing the education budget by a minimum of 10% would have some impact on the tax burden.

Cutting their kids adrift, but all for their own good.

These are your words though, not his.

Twat!

Quite!

 

[Tooting Gull]

It isn't an over-simplification. Just a simplification. And I don't think you're a twat Binky. I have a lot of empathy for your situation, you sound like you were faced with a difficult choice, and you are typical of the people put in a situation that long-term I would love to remove. The local comps are 'not good enough', you feel you would be letting your kids down by sending them there, and you can afford (just, you seem to be saying) to do something about it.

Only an idiot would claim it is an easy decision, and I'm not claiming that. But there is a bigger picture out there and while those in your situation shun the state schools, nothing will change.

 

[wellquickwoody]

And I'mk sure the billions given to his Tory friends in tax cuts will be wisely spent as well, don't you!. Probably not Ibiza just a bit more upmarket I suspect.

Absolutely spot on. Fed up with paying for other peoples kids, do it yourselves.

Wrong quote above, oops, I completely disagree with Mileoakman. Not surprising as I got out of there many years ago!
(Joke!)

 

[wellquickwoody]

One would have thought that society would have evolved enough to stop having children if you can not or can barely afford them. Infant mortality rates now means that you don't need twelve babies in the hope that a few will reach adulthood. Some people are just selfish, particularly when it comes to collecting babies and expecting the state to pick up the bill when the persons have, perhaps, contributed very little to society.

 

[wellquickwoody]

and yet I was accused yesterday being being selfish and not giving a shit about society even though I have worked and paid into the tax system for over 30 years without a single dole payment made, have no children and have never claimed a penny in child benefits and all the other related benefits, supported myself and never claimed income support and have luckily not been a burden on the nhs yet.

How does this work

With you on this U S.

 

[The Large One]

Blimey, some people are talking like every private school is Westminster School or Christ's Hospital, and that in comparison state schools are run like borstals.

Some private schools are quite modest.

There are some excellent state schools which, down to a number of factors, exceed the achievements of some private schools. Similarly, if it's an alternative type of education you're after, you have no choice but to go to a fee-paying school. Many parents opt to send their child(ren) to a fee-paying school for a number of reasons, and not all of them are down to the dogma that state schools are bad in comparison to fee-paying schools.

The charitable status thing is a bit of a red herring. These are made of voluntary charitable donations, and can often help the school present better facilities to their pupils - it's not all about making sure Eton's rifle cabinets are kept stocked up. It could be the difference between buying a new football kit or sending kids on a Duke of Edinburgh expedition without having to put the school fees up thereby incurring further tax costs.

 

[larus]

What's wrong with private education. I don't want a dictatorship, I want a democracy. As per normal, the Lefties views are always based on envy (or that's how they get portrayed). The parents who pay for private education have already paid for state education via their taxes. They don't get a refund or an allowance to transfer to the private school.

As for the education system being great; this has been 'achieved' on borrowed money. The level of spending/taxation is unbalanced (bit like our PM, with his bullying).

 

[wellquickwoody]

According to the British Social Attitudes survey, 57 percent of single mothers have never lived with the fathers of their children.

Well perhaps we should make it less socially acceptable to consider having children unless in a stable, long term relationship.

 

[The Large One]

Well perhaps we should make it less socially acceptable to consider having children unless in a stable, long term relationship.

How would you go about achieving that?

 

[wellquickwoody]

How would you go about achieving that?

Sterilise all council house tenants?

 

[Gwylan]

Well perhaps we should make it less socially acceptable to consider having children unless in a stable, long term relationship.

I think it's going to be hard to make single parenthood socially unacceptable when three out of four of the Queen's children are divorced.

If the family of the head of state thinks it's all right, why should the rest of us think anyone different?

The answer is, of course, is that we shouldn't. Try to mould social attitudes is extremely difficult

 

[binky]

But there is a bigger picture out there and while those in your situation shun the state schools, nothing will change.

But you have just said...

The bottom line is you either do believe in a second, elitist education avenue for rich parents, or you don't.

So for the record.
1) I send my children to a private school.
2) I don't believe in a second, elitist education avenue for rich parents.

...because it's not elitist, and I'm not rich.

If the state schools were better, I would have no need to impoverish myself by "shunning" them.
Forcing my children into a substandard school will not help that school. It will just level the playing field to the lowest common denominator.

Raise the standards of all the state schools, to that of the private sector, and there will be no need for the majority of private schools to exist.

There will always be an Eton, and it will always be patronised, even if the education offered there was worse than that on offer in the state sector.
Eton and it's ilk are a seperate case, and in many ways deserve to be the target of dogma based class warfare.
But don't combine all private schools, or the parents who chose to send their children there, together into the same anti privilige ranting.
You just make yourself look stupid, ignorant, and politically partisan.

 

[Tooting Gull]

Raise the standards of all the state schools, to that of the private sector, and there will be no need for the majority of private schools to exist.

.

Jesus, what have I been saying? How can you state this, and then come out with all the other stuff? How do you think this is achieved. By doing nothing?

You're obviously a bit sensitive about this, hence all the personal stuff. Fair enough. I don't agree with you over private education. Deal with it.

 

[User removed 4]

How would you go about achieving that?

Not dishing out a council flat and benefits to every 17 year old who knocks a kid out would be a start, seriously , that might make them think twice,i'm pretty sure my 17 year old chav second cousin would be less inclined to have got pregnant if she knew she had to live in some sort of unmarried mothers hostel , noone wants to go back to the old days of babies being torn away from sobbing mothers to be adopted but we either carry on as we are , or there are some stark choices to be made.

 

[ROSM]

Well perhaps we should make it less socially acceptable to consider having children unless in a stable, long term relationship.

But you've missed the rest of his post out.

FWIW - I too (until the birth of my children) could have said what Uncle Spielberg did however with a very minor aberation in the late 80's I've not voted Tory. I wasn't getting anything back from the provision of public services but still felt idealogically that was how I wanted to vote.

By being a parent I've (or my family) received two Trust fund amounts and child allowance, funding for 10 hours a week childcare for my 3 year old (one month of it so far) and more reliance on the NHS than I personally have ever needed including birth care and a hospital stay for my eldest following issues with the local GP who failed to diagnose an illness (and that GP hadn't got better or worse since the early 90's but his replacement since enforced retirement is phenomenally better).

In all cases I have been impressed by the facilities and staff involved (with the exception of said GP) and if I am faced (as the Conservatives seem to be saying) with a choice between more money in my employer's/my back pocket or less money but public services provided that may well benefit those who don't 'deserve it' as well then I am going to choose to vote the same way again. Sorry but that's just the way I feel

 

[User removed 4]

I think it's going to be hard to make single parenthood socially unacceptable when three out of four of the Queen's children are divorced.

If the family of the head of state thinks it's all right, why should the rest of us think anyone different?

The answer is, of course, is that we shouldn't. Try to mould social attitudes is extremely difficult

He means single parenthood as a choice, either as a straightforward one or being too f***ing thick to use contraception, not as a result of marriage breakdown.