Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

The first post-Christmas poll has LAB leading by 26% – politicalbetting.com

24

Comments

  • Options
    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    Milan Reports 50% of Passengers on China Flights Have Covid
    (Bloomberg) -- Italian health authorities will begin testing all arrivals from China for Covid after almost half of the passengers on two flights to Milan were found to have the virus.


    CNN: U.S. will require airline passengers traveling from China to test negative for Covid

    https://twitter.com/PonchoZoho/status/1608201518125142024?s=20&t=7mUGpkQErBPa7cbv9r8lDw

    Yes but we have the vaccine now, this is not January 2020
    Sure. But we should be insane if we are not "a tad worried"

    Hopefully the Final Great Chinese Wave will be the end of Covid as a significant emergency. And it will become a new flu, dangerous to some, but no cause to reorder society

    It feels like the last set of rocks on a nasty white water rafting course. You are nearly through, but there is still one last chance you will drown
    Let me guess, you're going to flee to some remote part of the UK, demand severe Covid-19 restrictions and in a few months time criticise the government for doing something about it and wanting Nürnberg style trials for the scientists?
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,335
    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    Milan Reports 50% of Passengers on China Flights Have Covid
    (Bloomberg) -- Italian health authorities will begin testing all arrivals from China for Covid after almost half of the passengers on two flights to Milan were found to have the virus.


    CNN: U.S. will require airline passengers traveling from China to test negative for Covid

    https://twitter.com/PonchoZoho/status/1608201518125142024?s=20&t=7mUGpkQErBPa7cbv9r8lDw

    Yes but we have the vaccine now, this is not January 2020
    Sure. But we should be insane if we are not "a tad worried"

    Hopefully the Final Great Chinese Wave will be the end of Covid as a significant emergency. And it will become a new flu, dangerous to some, but no cause to reorder society

    It feels like the last set of rocks on a nasty white water rafting course. You are nearly through, but there is still one last chance you will drown
    How ill are these 50% of passengers? I’d suggest not very if they are flying.
    Not wishing to minimise concerns but we should try to keep a sense of perspective. Covid is not exactly low in the U.K. right now anyway.
  • Options
    DriverDriver Posts: 4,522
    .
    Jonathan said:

    There is no money thanks to Liz, Rishi and co. Are tax breaks for private education an affordable, fair priority? No. If you don’t like this brutal reality, take it up with the Tories.

    Removing the "tax break" won't raise any money. And isn't intended to.
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,335
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Milan Reports 50% of Passengers on China Flights Have Covid
    (Bloomberg) -- Italian health authorities will begin testing all arrivals from China for Covid after almost half of the passengers on two flights to Milan were found to have the virus.


    CNN: U.S. will require airline passengers traveling from China to test negative for Covid

    https://twitter.com/PonchoZoho/status/1608201518125142024?s=20&t=7mUGpkQErBPa7cbv9r8lDw

    Do need to keep perspective. 1 in 45 Britons has Covid at present, so the added effect of a few arrivals from China makes little difference.
    Of which a few thousand are in hospital, out of the well over a million people with covid.
  • Options
    So @ydoethur, how can you possibly decide where to put the tax if you say only boarding schools should be covered? Where does the axe fall, is it how much the fees are a year? I can see why Labour just said stick it on all purely from ease of administration
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,335
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Milan Reports 50% of Passengers on China Flights Have Covid
    (Bloomberg) -- Italian health authorities will begin testing all arrivals from China for Covid after almost half of the passengers on two flights to Milan were found to have the virus.


    CNN: U.S. will require airline passengers traveling from China to test negative for Covid

    https://twitter.com/PonchoZoho/status/1608201518125142024?s=20&t=7mUGpkQErBPa7cbv9r8lDw

    Do need to keep perspective. 1 in 45 Britons has Covid at present, so the added effect of a few arrivals from China makes little difference.
    Unless they are carrying a new variant
    Even if they are, it is unlikely to be the reason for the high infection rates.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,913
    Driver said:

    .

    Jonathan said:

    There is no money thanks to Liz, Rishi and co. Are tax breaks for private education an affordable, fair priority? No. If you don’t like this brutal reality, take it up with the Tories.

    Removing the "tax break" won't raise any money. And isn't intended to.
    We’re all in this together.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,464

    So @ydoethur, how can you possibly decide where to put the tax if you say only boarding schools should be covered? Where does the axe fall, is it how much the fees are a year? I can see why Labour just said stick it on all purely from ease of administration

    As I say, on boarding fees, which are usually charged for separately.

    And that simplicity Labour proposed, as I pointed out above, might cause significant problems of its own by roping in many things it wasn't intended to cover but are actually beneficial.
  • Options
    DriverDriver Posts: 4,522
    Jonathan said:

    Driver said:

    .

    Jonathan said:

    There is no money thanks to Liz, Rishi and co. Are tax breaks for private education an affordable, fair priority? No. If you don’t like this brutal reality, take it up with the Tories.

    Removing the "tax break" won't raise any money. And isn't intended to.
    We’re all in this together.
    So you admit it's gesture politics, and therefore pointless?
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    So @ydoethur, how can you possibly decide where to put the tax if you say only boarding schools should be covered? Where does the axe fall, is it how much the fees are a year? I can see why Labour just said stick it on all purely from ease of administration

    As I say, on boarding fees, which are usually charged for separately.

    And that simplicity Labour proposed, as I pointed out above, might cause significant problems of its own by roping in many things it wasn't intended to cover but are actually beneficial.
    Not a bad idea to charge just on the boarding fees.

    Although in my view as I said towards the end even the day kids were becoming far more "elite", I actually felt quite out of place at times and indeed was bullied about it
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,913
    Driver said:

    Jonathan said:

    Driver said:

    .

    Jonathan said:

    There is no money thanks to Liz, Rishi and co. Are tax breaks for private education an affordable, fair priority? No. If you don’t like this brutal reality, take it up with the Tories.

    Removing the "tax break" won't raise any money. And isn't intended to.
    We’re all in this together.
    So you admit it's gesture politics, and therefore pointless?
    Every penny helps.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,843

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Milan Reports 50% of Passengers on China Flights Have Covid
    (Bloomberg) -- Italian health authorities will begin testing all arrivals from China for Covid after almost half of the passengers on two flights to Milan were found to have the virus.


    CNN: U.S. will require airline passengers traveling from China to test negative for Covid

    https://twitter.com/PonchoZoho/status/1608201518125142024?s=20&t=7mUGpkQErBPa7cbv9r8lDw

    Do need to keep perspective. 1 in 45 Britons has Covid at present, so the added effect of a few arrivals from China makes little difference.
    Of which a few thousand are in hospital, out of the well over a million people with covid.
    In my hospital we have 180 inpatients with covid, though often not their main diagnosis even when adding complexity to their management. It is adding significant strain to the system.
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,335
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Milan Reports 50% of Passengers on China Flights Have Covid
    (Bloomberg) -- Italian health authorities will begin testing all arrivals from China for Covid after almost half of the passengers on two flights to Milan were found to have the virus.


    CNN: U.S. will require airline passengers traveling from China to test negative for Covid

    https://twitter.com/PonchoZoho/status/1608201518125142024?s=20&t=7mUGpkQErBPa7cbv9r8lDw

    Do need to keep perspective. 1 in 45 Britons has Covid at present, so the added effect of a few arrivals from China makes little difference.
    Of which a few thousand are in hospital, out of the well over a million people with covid.
    In my hospital we have 180 inpatients with covid, though often not their main diagnosis even when adding complexity to their management. It is adding significant strain to the system.
    I don’t disagree, just trying to counter the crisis monger.
  • Options
    DJ41DJ41 Posts: 792

    Foxy said:

    Is private healthcare subject to VAT? If yes, then private schools should be too. Both are provided to all by the state, so taking the private option is a choice.
    Fundamentally I believe we pay too little tax for the services we want. The harder question is how you levy those taxes in a fair way. Personally I’d prefer flat taxation. The more you earn, the more you pay, but no stupid cliff edges and marginal rates. Seems simple to me, so there must be something wrong with it.

    Private healthcare is currently VAT exempt I believe but, like private education, should be VATable imo.
    VAT is payable on cosmetic surgery, and a few other niche areas.

    VAT is always a bit daft, hence cakes vs biscuits, whether a pasty is still warm etc.

    A reasonable approach is to require a school to spend more of its income on charitable acts than it saves in VAT in order to maintain charitable status.
    Education is a charitable purpose according to the Charity commission
    Don't be silly. Selling something at the market rate to those who can afford it isn't charity. What the schools do that is supposedly charitable (ha ha) is something else.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,843
    edited December 2022

    ydoethur said:

    So @ydoethur, how can you possibly decide where to put the tax if you say only boarding schools should be covered? Where does the axe fall, is it how much the fees are a year? I can see why Labour just said stick it on all purely from ease of administration

    As I say, on boarding fees, which are usually charged for separately.

    And that simplicity Labour proposed, as I pointed out above, might cause significant problems of its own by roping in many things it wasn't intended to cover but are actually beneficial.
    Not a bad idea to charge just on the boarding fees.

    Although in my view as I said towards the end even the day kids were becoming far more "elite", I actually felt quite out of place at times and indeed was bullied about it
    Mrs Foxy went to a private school for a couple of years and hated it. Her parents scraped together enough to send her, and she was always the poorest in the class, with the other girls talking of their ponies and ski holidays etc. She was very glad to leave to go to a state sixth form.
  • Options
    DriverDriver Posts: 4,522
    Jonathan said:

    Driver said:

    Jonathan said:

    Driver said:

    .

    Jonathan said:

    There is no money thanks to Liz, Rishi and co. Are tax breaks for private education an affordable, fair priority? No. If you don’t like this brutal reality, take it up with the Tories.

    Removing the "tax break" won't raise any money. And isn't intended to.
    We’re all in this together.
    So you admit it's gesture politics, and therefore pointless?
    Every penny helps.
    What if it loses pennies?
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,104
    EPG said:

    tlg86 said:

    FPT:

    felix said:

    Tres said:

    Jonathan said:

    As a few of us have been saying.

    "Starmer has — and this is possible to glimpse despite his opacity — always been quite left-wing. He was to the left of every leader since he was in his twenties. Except Corbyn, because there is nobody to the left of Corbyn. But he was, at least, quite comfortable with Corbyn as leader. The alternative theory posits that this wasn’t play-acting. He didn’t just say that the 2017 manifesto was a foundational document for Labour, he actually meant it. He didn’t just run as a leader from the left — mainstream, not Corbynite, but still the left — that is actually his politics.

    But on becoming leader he understood he couldn’t win an election like that. He’d have to lowball voters. It took him a while to appreciate that, but once he did he was pretty robust about it. He has been focused and committed in his work of reassurance.

    If he were to capture power he would then be able to move the country leftward, with voter assent. He would return to something closer to his natural instinct. And it would not be the left who would feel betrayed."


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/keir-starmer-may-be-more-left-wing-than-he-lets-on-82fwdr2t7

    Yawn. New Labour, New Danger. Seen this every time a Labour leader looks like winning.
    The thing about pooh-poohing the boy who cried wolf is that the wolf did eventually come.

    10 years ago, I was living on about £100 a month after housing, commuting, bills and food and only paying basic rate. I've worked very hard to get where I am now. But, because I now have a six-figure income (and that's only in the last 18 months) Labour sees no difference between me and Elon Musk - despite me having very little equity.

    You can't expect me to want to vote for a party like that. And I won't be alone.
    Please elaborate on how Labour believe you and Elon Musk are the same.
    Labour will view me as the top 1%, the privileged elite, the wealthy, calibrate their political rhetoric to match - the politics of envy - and tax me as highly as they possibly can.

    I have no doubt it will be politically rewarding for them, but I think it will be bad for the country.

    "They can't possibly be worse than this lot" is a potent campaigning line, but - again - it's an emotive one and of course they can.

    They certainly can.
    And so to avoid taxes on income you will vote for a party that is terrified of taxing the capital you don't possess.
    Labour wants to put VAT on private schools.

    My daughter is at an independent prep school that I went to when I was eight years old. It costs a fair bit but we make sacrifices. We don't go on holiday quite as often as we'd like. We don't eat out as much. But it's a tradeoff we're willing to make. Of course, we're not on the breadline, but we don't lead the lifestyle some of our fellow middle-class professionals do - but it's a choice.

    The school was founded in 1936. It only has 210 pupils. It specialises in outdoor education. I acquired a lifelong love of hiking, camping and archery from it. My passion for design and technology too. Some of the teachers who taught me are still there now. The current headmaster is a real brick and works his socks off. He's a good egg. My daughter loves it there. She's settled, has lots of friends and is very happy. Her and her friends virtually skip into school. They play and learn outside every day.

    At weekends and holidays it throws its doors open to schoolkids in the local area, and runs adventure camps for inner city schoolkids. It also runs Chinese and Russian language courses that attract children from all over the region, to learn, facilities they struggle to find elsewhere.

    Labour's policies would target schools like this. We wouldn't be able to afford the increase in the fees. We'd be faced with wrenching our daughter out of a school she loves and her friends - for us, this is very very personal.

    The survival of the school itself would be in question. And, the benefits it offers to children and the wider community would be lost too. And, for what? So we can plough our extra money into consumption and higher house prices instead, and overburden our local state school instead?

    It might put a smile on the faces of some Labour activists but when it comes to the next election and you can't fathom why everyone doesn't think Labour is the best thing since sliced bread and is desperate to vote for them - think of us.
    I'm afraid that whole post has swayed me not a jot.
    Of course it won't - you're angry at the Tories - not without cause and have convinced yourself, as have so many others, that Starmer is moderate centre-left who won't frighten the horses while trhowing you bits of red meat. And you wish to bathe in the warm red glow of supporting a party that cares, that will probably return the the UKto the EU and do all and only nice things. You need to re-read Animal Farm - next time it's never different.
    "angry with the Tories" doesn't begin to cover it.

    Starmer is, I fear moderate centre-left. I suspect he will be far too moderate to achieve much good.

    I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable.

    Casino told us some time ago what his
    salary is; it's a good salary and no doubt well-deserved. Since the government judges that an adult can live on £335 pm, a couple on £525 pm, and a child on £245 pm I suspect Casino will find a way to fund the
    VAT on his daughter's school fees.

    But do you want him to be able to afford it? It sounds to me that your objection is the unfair advantage his daughter will have in life.

    Of course he doesn't. It is interesting that he said that CR's post did not move him a jot. Well, his (Benpointer's) posts have moved me.

    They remind me that Labour is still supported by people who are insanely envious of anyone that has done better than them. That is is always someone else's fault for their own sad mediocrity. If only they had the privileges of private education then they too could be "rich", but of course they wouldn't really want that would they?

    Labour is the mover of everything to the lowest common denominator; the purveyors of the belief that more government and more taxation is always the answer, that society can be made better by them paying attention to nasty and vindictive policy change that will not move the dial of human happiness one iota.

    Yes, his posts definitely moved me.
    I don't think outdoor education is a particularly moving story. You can just go camping. Now I don't care if people spend their money on education versus holidays, but Labour has always thought that segregation by financial means is bad, so it doesn't stun me that they would like to fund such segregated systems less, even if they bring benefits to the people who get the better schools, which is again not a very surprising or moving fact.
    It’s interesting though - it wouldn’t appeal to me either. But it’s a niche segment within the education system which may well be made unaffordable for many and potentially be non-viable. In return for a de minimis amount of gross tax revenue (and even less once the costs of educating other kids it’ll taken into account).

    So you have a reduction in diversity of education, reduction in capacity in the system, a limited net gain in revenue for the government and a small group of people very unhappy.

    Why does that concoction make the country a better place?
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,843

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Milan Reports 50% of Passengers on China Flights Have Covid
    (Bloomberg) -- Italian health authorities will begin testing all arrivals from China for Covid after almost half of the passengers on two flights to Milan were found to have the virus.


    CNN: U.S. will require airline passengers traveling from China to test negative for Covid

    https://twitter.com/PonchoZoho/status/1608201518125142024?s=20&t=7mUGpkQErBPa7cbv9r8lDw

    Do need to keep perspective. 1 in 45 Britons has Covid at present, so the added effect of a few arrivals from China makes little difference.
    Of which a few thousand are in hospital, out of the well over a million people with covid.
    In my hospital we have 180 inpatients with covid, though often not their main diagnosis even when adding complexity to their management. It is adding significant strain to the system.
    I don’t disagree, just trying to counter the crisis monger.
    Yes, it is something we could manage reasonably comfortably if we had a half dozen more staffed medical wards. It is all about capacity really. Countries with more health capacity coped better with covid and have resumed normal service. The NHS has always regulated expenditure by restricting supply.
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,104

    tlg86 said:

    FPT:

    felix said:

    Tres said:

    Jonathan said:

    As a few of us have been saying.

    "Starmer has — and this is possible to glimpse despite his opacity — always been quite left-wing. He was to the left of every leader since he was in his twenties. Except Corbyn, because there is nobody to the left of Corbyn. But he was, at least, quite comfortable with Corbyn as leader. The alternative theory posits that this wasn’t play-acting. He didn’t just say that the 2017 manifesto was a foundational document for Labour, he actually meant it. He didn’t just run as a leader from the left — mainstream, not Corbynite, but still the left — that is actually his politics.

    But on becoming leader he understood he couldn’t win an election like that. He’d have to lowball voters. It took him a while to appreciate that, but once he did he was pretty robust about it. He has been focused and committed in his work of reassurance.

    If he were to capture power he would then be able to move the country leftward, with voter assent. He would return to something closer to his natural instinct. And it would not be the left who would feel betrayed."


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/keir-starmer-may-be-more-left-wing-than-he-lets-on-82fwdr2t7

    Yawn. New Labour, New Danger. Seen this every time a Labour leader looks like winning.
    The thing about pooh-poohing the boy who cried wolf is that the wolf did eventually come.

    10 years ago, I was living on about £100 a month after housing, commuting, bills and food and only paying basic rate. I've worked very hard to get where I am now. But, because I now have a six-figure income (and that's only in the last 18 months) Labour sees no difference between me and Elon Musk - despite me having very little equity.

    You can't expect me to want to vote for a party like that. And I won't be alone.
    Please elaborate on how Labour believe you and Elon Musk are the same.
    Labour will view me as the top 1%, the privileged elite, the wealthy, calibrate their political rhetoric to match - the politics of envy - and tax me as highly as they possibly can.

    I have no doubt it will be politically rewarding for them, but I think it will be bad for the country.

    "They can't possibly be worse than this lot" is a potent campaigning line, but - again - it's an emotive one and of course they can.

    They certainly can.
    And so to avoid taxes on income you will vote for a party that is terrified of taxing the capital you don't possess.
    Labour wants to put VAT on private schools.

    My daughter is at an independent prep school that I went to when I was eight years old. It costs a fair bit but we make sacrifices. We don't go on holiday quite as often as we'd like. We don't eat out as much. But it's a tradeoff we're willing to make. Of course, we're not on the breadline, but we don't lead the lifestyle some of our fellow middle-class professionals do - but it's a choice.

    The school was founded in 1936. It only has 210 pupils. It specialises in outdoor education. I acquired a lifelong love of hiking, camping and archery from it. My passion for design and technology too. Some of the teachers who taught me are still there now. The current headmaster is a real brick and works his socks off. He's a good egg. My daughter loves it there. She's settled, has lots of friends and is very happy. Her and her friends virtually skip into school. They play and learn outside every day.

    At weekends and holidays it throws its doors open to schoolkids in the local area, and runs adventure camps for inner city schoolkids. It also runs Chinese and Russian language courses that attract children from all over the region, to learn, facilities they struggle to find elsewhere.

    Labour's policies would target schools like this. We wouldn't be able to afford the increase in the fees. We'd be faced with wrenching our daughter out of a school she loves and her friends - for us, this is very very personal.

    The survival of the school itself would be in question. And, the benefits it offers to children and the wider community would be lost too. And, for what? So we can plough our extra money into consumption and higher house prices instead, and overburden our local state school instead?

    It might put a smile on the faces of some Labour activists but when it comes to the next election and you can't fathom why everyone doesn't think Labour is the best thing since sliced bread and is desperate to vote for them - think of us.
    I'm afraid that whole post has swayed me not a jot.
    Of course it won't - you're angry at the Tories - not without cause and have convinced yourself, as have so many others, that Starmer is moderate centre-left who won't frighten the horses while trhowing you bits of red meat. And you wish to bathe in the warm red glow of supporting a party that cares, that will probably return the the UKto the EU and do all and only nice things. You need to re-read Animal Farm - next time it's never different.
    "angry with the Tories" doesn't begin to cover it.

    Starmer is, I fear moderate centre-left. I suspect he will be far too moderate to achieve much good.

    I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable.

    Casino told us some time ago what his
    salary is; it's a good salary and no doubt well-deserved. Since the government judges that an adult can live on £335 pm, a couple on £525 pm, and a child on £245 pm I suspect Casino will find a way to fund the
    VAT on his daughter's school fees.

    But do you want him to be able to afford it? It sounds to me that your objection is the unfair advantage his daughter will have in life.

    I'll repeat the salient point from my post: "I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable. "
    Because the charitable benefit is from the use of the facilities during weekends and holidays. If the increase in taxes makes that non-viable then charitable benefit is removed.
  • Options
    Driver said:

    Jonathan said:

    Driver said:

    Jonathan said:

    Driver said:

    .

    Jonathan said:

    There is no money thanks to Liz, Rishi and co. Are tax breaks for private education an affordable, fair priority? No. If you don’t like this brutal reality, take it up with the Tories.

    Removing the "tax break" won't raise any money. And isn't intended to.
    We’re all in this together.
    So you admit it's gesture politics, and therefore pointless?
    Every penny helps.
    What if it loses pennies?
    It would be the will of the people.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,913
    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    So @ydoethur, how can you possibly decide where to put the tax if you say only boarding schools should be covered? Where does the axe fall, is it how much the fees are a year? I can see why Labour just said stick it on all purely from ease of administration

    As I say, on boarding fees, which are usually charged for separately.

    And that simplicity Labour proposed, as I pointed out above, might cause significant problems of its own by roping in many things it wasn't intended to cover but are actually beneficial.
    Not a bad idea to charge just on the boarding fees.

    Although in my view as I said towards the end even the day kids were becoming far more "elite", I actually felt quite out of place at times and indeed was bullied about it
    Mrs Foxy went to a private school for a couple of years and hated it. Her parents scraped together enough to send her, and she was always the poorest in the class, with the other girls talking of their ponies and ski holidays etc. She was very glad to leave to go to a state sixth form.
    Private education can work for some. Some parents want something different. I don’t think it’s something the state should subsidise. The money is needed elsewhere. It’s a question of priorities in hard times. This is clearly a luxury.
  • Options

    tlg86 said:

    FPT:

    felix said:

    Tres said:

    Jonathan said:

    As a few of us have been saying.

    "Starmer has — and this is possible to glimpse despite his opacity — always been quite left-wing. He was to the left of every leader since he was in his twenties. Except Corbyn, because there is nobody to the left of Corbyn. But he was, at least, quite comfortable with Corbyn as leader. The alternative theory posits that this wasn’t play-acting. He didn’t just say that the 2017 manifesto was a foundational document for Labour, he actually meant it. He didn’t just run as a leader from the left — mainstream, not Corbynite, but still the left — that is actually his politics.

    But on becoming leader he understood he couldn’t win an election like that. He’d have to lowball voters. It took him a while to appreciate that, but once he did he was pretty robust about it. He has been focused and committed in his work of reassurance.

    If he were to capture power he would then be able to move the country leftward, with voter assent. He would return to something closer to his natural instinct. And it would not be the left who would feel betrayed."


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/keir-starmer-may-be-more-left-wing-than-he-lets-on-82fwdr2t7

    Yawn. New Labour, New Danger. Seen this every time a Labour leader looks like winning.
    The thing about pooh-poohing the boy who cried wolf is that the wolf did eventually come.

    10 years ago, I was living on about £100 a month after housing, commuting, bills and food and only paying basic rate. I've worked very hard to get where I am now. But, because I now have a six-figure income (and that's only in the last 18 months) Labour sees no difference between me and Elon Musk - despite me having very little equity.

    You can't expect me to want to vote for a party like that. And I won't be alone.
    Please elaborate on how Labour believe you and Elon Musk are the same.
    Labour will view me as the top 1%, the privileged elite, the wealthy, calibrate their political rhetoric to match - the politics of envy - and tax me as highly as they possibly can.

    I have no doubt it will be politically rewarding for them, but I think it will be bad for the country.

    "They can't possibly be worse than this lot" is a potent campaigning line, but - again - it's an emotive one and of course they can.

    They certainly can.
    And so to avoid taxes on income you will vote for a party that is terrified of taxing the capital you don't possess.
    Labour wants to put VAT on private schools.

    My daughter is at an independent prep school that I went to when I was eight years old. It costs a fair bit but we make sacrifices. We don't go on holiday quite as often as we'd like. We don't eat out as much. But it's a tradeoff we're willing to make. Of course, we're not on the breadline, but we don't lead the lifestyle some of our fellow middle-class professionals do - but it's a choice.

    The school was founded in 1936. It only has 210 pupils. It specialises in outdoor education. I acquired a lifelong love of hiking, camping and archery from it. My passion for design and technology too. Some of the teachers who taught me are still there now. The current headmaster is a real brick and works his socks off. He's a good egg. My daughter loves it there. She's settled, has lots of friends and is very happy. Her and her friends virtually skip into school. They play and learn outside every day.

    At weekends and holidays it throws its doors open to schoolkids in the local area, and runs adventure camps for inner city schoolkids. It also runs Chinese and Russian language courses that attract children from all over the region, to learn, facilities they struggle to find elsewhere.

    Labour's policies would target schools like this. We wouldn't be able to afford the increase in the fees. We'd be faced with wrenching our daughter out of a school she loves and her friends - for us, this is very very personal.

    The survival of the school itself would be in question. And, the benefits it offers to children and the wider community would be lost too. And, for what? So we can plough our extra money into consumption and higher house prices instead, and overburden our local state school instead?

    It might put a smile on the faces of some Labour activists but when it comes to the next election and you can't fathom why everyone doesn't think Labour is the best thing since sliced bread and is desperate to vote for them - think of us.
    I'm afraid that whole post has swayed me not a jot.
    Of course it won't - you're angry at the Tories - not without cause and have convinced yourself, as have so many others, that Starmer is moderate centre-left who won't frighten the horses while trhowing you bits of red meat. And you wish to bathe in the warm red glow of supporting a party that cares, that will probably return the the UKto the EU and do all and only nice things. You need to re-read Animal Farm - next time it's never different.
    "angry with the Tories" doesn't begin to cover it.

    Starmer is, I fear moderate centre-left. I suspect he will be far too moderate to achieve much good.

    I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable.

    Casino told us some time ago what his
    salary is; it's a good salary and no doubt well-deserved. Since the government judges that an adult can live on £335 pm, a couple on £525 pm, and a child on £245 pm I suspect Casino will find a way to fund the
    VAT on his daughter's school fees.

    But do you want him to be able to afford it? It sounds to me that your objection is the unfair advantage his daughter will have in life.

    I'll repeat the salient point from my post: "I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable. "
    Because the charitable benefit is from the use of the facilities during weekends and holidays. If the increase in taxes makes that non-viable then charitable benefit is removed.
    Eton had a new sports hall built whilst the school around the corner was asking for donations to buy teaching supplies. How is that fair
  • Options
    DougSealDougSeal Posts: 11,295
    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    Milan Reports 50% of Passengers on China Flights Have Covid
    (Bloomberg) -- Italian health authorities will begin testing all arrivals from China for Covid after almost half of the passengers on two flights to Milan were found to have the virus.


    CNN: U.S. will require airline passengers traveling from China to test negative for Covid

    https://twitter.com/PonchoZoho/status/1608201518125142024?s=20&t=7mUGpkQErBPa7cbv9r8lDw

    Yes but we have the vaccine now, this is not January 2020
    Sure. But we should be insane if we are not "a tad worried"

    Hopefully the Final Great Chinese Wave will be the end of Covid as a significant emergency. And it will become a new flu, dangerous to some, but no cause to reorder society

    It feels like the last set of rocks on a nasty white water rafting course. You are nearly through, but there is still one last chance you will drown
    Reading you I lose track of what to be worried about…we’re at which scene in Threads at the moment? How close are we to enslavement by AI overlords? How far back do I have to wind back my terror dial? 2 years? It’s hard to keep up with you.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,572
    We would be wise to forbid flights from China, and entry to Chinese nationals, for a few months

    The Chinese gave us this virus, from their lab, they then lied about it in multiple ways, exported it around the world (quite deliberately), so let them suck on its nasty fag end, alone
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,104

    tlg86 said:

    FPT:

    felix said:

    Tres said:

    Jonathan said:

    As a few of us have been saying.

    "Starmer has — and this is possible to glimpse despite his opacity — always been quite left-wing. He was to the left of every leader since he was in his twenties. Except Corbyn, because there is nobody to the left of Corbyn. But he was, at least, quite comfortable with Corbyn as leader. The alternative theory posits that this wasn’t play-acting. He didn’t just say that the 2017 manifesto was a foundational document for Labour, he actually meant it. He didn’t just run as a leader from the left — mainstream, not Corbynite, but still the left — that is actually his politics.

    But on becoming leader he understood he couldn’t win an election like that. He’d have to lowball voters. It took him a while to appreciate that, but once he did he was pretty robust about it. He has been focused and committed in his work of reassurance.

    If he were to capture power he would then be able to move the country leftward, with voter assent. He would return to something closer to his natural instinct. And it would not be the left who would feel betrayed."


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/keir-starmer-may-be-more-left-wing-than-he-lets-on-82fwdr2t7

    Yawn. New Labour, New Danger. Seen this every time a Labour leader looks like winning.
    The thing about pooh-poohing the boy who cried wolf is that the wolf did eventually come.

    10 years ago, I was living on about £100 a month after housing, commuting, bills and food and only paying basic rate. I've worked very hard to get where I am now. But, because I now have a six-figure income (and that's only in the last 18 months) Labour sees no difference between me and Elon Musk - despite me having very little equity.

    You can't expect me to want to vote for a party like that. And I won't be alone.
    Please elaborate on how Labour believe you and Elon Musk are the same.
    Labour will view me as the top 1%, the privileged elite, the wealthy, calibrate their political rhetoric to match - the politics of envy - and tax me as highly as they possibly can.

    I have no doubt it will be politically rewarding for them, but I think it will be bad for the country.

    "They can't possibly be worse than this lot" is a potent campaigning line, but - again - it's an emotive one and of course they can.

    They certainly can.
    And so to avoid taxes on income you will vote for a party that is terrified of taxing the capital you don't possess.
    Labour wants to put VAT on private schools.

    My daughter is at an independent prep school that I went to when I was eight years old. It costs a fair bit but we make sacrifices. We don't go on holiday quite as often as we'd like. We don't eat out as much. But it's a tradeoff we're willing to make. Of course, we're not on the breadline, but we don't lead the lifestyle some of our fellow middle-class professionals do - but it's a choice.

    The school was founded in 1936. It only has 210 pupils. It specialises in outdoor education. I acquired a lifelong love of hiking, camping and archery from it. My passion for design and technology too. Some of the teachers who taught me are still there now. The current headmaster is a real brick and works his socks off. He's a good egg. My daughter loves it there. She's settled, has lots of friends and is very happy. Her and her friends virtually skip into school. They play and learn outside every day.

    At weekends and holidays it throws its doors open to schoolkids in the local area, and runs adventure camps for inner city schoolkids. It also runs Chinese and Russian language courses that attract children from all over the region, to learn, facilities they struggle to find elsewhere.

    Labour's policies would target schools like this. We wouldn't be able to afford the increase in the fees. We'd be faced with wrenching our daughter out of a school she loves and her friends - for us, this is very very personal.

    The survival of the school itself would be in question. And, the benefits it offers to children and the wider community would be lost too. And, for what? So we can plough our extra money into consumption and higher house prices instead, and overburden our local state school instead?

    It might put a smile on the faces of some Labour activists but when it comes to the next election and you can't fathom why everyone doesn't think Labour is the best thing since sliced bread and is desperate to vote for them - think of us.
    I'm afraid that whole post has swayed me not a jot.
    Of course it won't - you're angry at the Tories - not without cause and have convinced yourself, as have so many others, that Starmer is moderate centre-left who won't frighten the horses while trhowing you bits of red meat. And you wish to bathe in the warm red glow of supporting a party that cares, that will probably return the the UKto the EU and do all and only nice things. You need to re-read Animal Farm - next time it's never different.
    "angry with the Tories" doesn't begin to cover it.

    Starmer is, I fear moderate centre-left. I suspect he will be far too moderate to achieve much good.

    I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable.

    Casino told us some time ago what his
    salary is; it's a good salary and no doubt well-deserved. Since the government judges that an adult can live on £335 pm, a couple on £525 pm, and a child on £245 pm I suspect Casino will find a way to fund the
    VAT on his daughter's school fees.

    But do you want him to be able to afford it? It sounds to me that your objection is the unfair advantage his daughter will have in life.

    I'll repeat the salient point from my post: "I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable. "
    There is another thing worth remembering. State school funding has been put through the mangle over the last decade, roughly a ten percent cut per pupil from 2010 to 2020. And the state sector has been told to get on with it, work more efficiently yada yada.
    In that context (plus the knowledge that private businesses set charges at "as much as we can get away with" more than "cost plus reasonable margin"), I'm not sure that private schools should be a priority for tax allowances. Not because of hate or envy, just because there are other kids who would benefit more.
    Foregone tax is not the same as a tax allowance.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,216
    NEW: Defra has confirmed that proper Border Control Posts will need to be constructed at Northern Ireland ports as part of the UK Govt’s unilateral green lane/ red lane plan. The BCPs will be needed to enforce EU agri-food rules for ‘red lane goods’.
    https://twitter.com/JP_Biz/status/1608131739020595200
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,843

    tlg86 said:

    FPT:

    felix said:

    Tres said:

    Jonathan said:

    As a few of us have been saying.

    "Starmer has — and this is possible to glimpse despite his opacity — always been quite left-wing. He was to the left of every leader since he was in his twenties. Except Corbyn, because there is nobody to the left of Corbyn. But he was, at least, quite comfortable with Corbyn as leader. The alternative theory posits that this wasn’t play-acting. He didn’t just say that the 2017 manifesto was a foundational document for Labour, he actually meant it. He didn’t just run as a leader from the left — mainstream, not Corbynite, but still the left — that is actually his politics.

    But on becoming leader he understood he couldn’t win an election like that. He’d have to lowball voters. It took him a while to appreciate that, but once he did he was pretty robust about it. He has been focused and committed in his work of reassurance.

    If he were to capture power he would then be able to move the country leftward, with voter assent. He would return to something closer to his natural instinct. And it would not be the left who would feel betrayed."


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/keir-starmer-may-be-more-left-wing-than-he-lets-on-82fwdr2t7

    Yawn. New Labour, New Danger. Seen this every time a Labour leader looks like winning.
    The thing about pooh-poohing the boy who cried wolf is that the wolf did eventually come.

    10 years ago, I was living on about £100 a month after housing, commuting, bills and food and only paying basic rate. I've worked very hard to get where I am now. But, because I now have a six-figure income (and that's only in the last 18 months) Labour sees no difference between me and Elon Musk - despite me having very little equity.

    You can't expect me to want to vote for a party like that. And I won't be alone.
    Please elaborate on how Labour believe you and Elon Musk are the same.
    Labour will view me as the top 1%, the privileged elite, the wealthy, calibrate their political rhetoric to match - the politics of envy - and tax me as highly as they possibly can.

    I have no doubt it will be politically rewarding for them, but I think it will be bad for the country.

    "They can't possibly be worse than this lot" is a potent campaigning line, but - again - it's an emotive one and of course they can.

    They certainly can.
    And so to avoid taxes on income you will vote for a party that is terrified of taxing the capital you don't possess.
    Labour wants to put VAT on private schools.

    My daughter is at an independent prep school that I went to when I was eight years old. It costs a fair bit but we make sacrifices. We don't go on holiday quite as often as we'd like. We don't eat out as much. But it's a tradeoff we're willing to make. Of course, we're not on the breadline, but we don't lead the lifestyle some of our fellow middle-class professionals do - but it's a choice.

    The school was founded in 1936. It only has 210 pupils. It specialises in outdoor education. I acquired a lifelong love of hiking, camping and archery from it. My passion for design and technology too. Some of the teachers who taught me are still there now. The current headmaster is a real brick and works his socks off. He's a good egg. My daughter loves it there. She's settled, has lots of friends and is very happy. Her and her friends virtually skip into school. They play and learn outside every day.

    At weekends and holidays it throws its doors open to schoolkids in the local area, and runs adventure camps for inner city schoolkids. It also runs Chinese and Russian language courses that attract children from all over the region, to learn, facilities they struggle to find elsewhere.

    Labour's policies would target schools like this. We wouldn't be able to afford the increase in the fees. We'd be faced with wrenching our daughter out of a school she loves and her friends - for us, this is very very personal.

    The survival of the school itself would be in question. And, the benefits it offers to children and the wider community would be lost too. And, for what? So we can plough our extra money into consumption and higher house prices instead, and overburden our local state school instead?

    It might put a smile on the faces of some Labour activists but when it comes to the next election and you can't fathom why everyone doesn't think Labour is the best thing since sliced bread and is desperate to vote for them - think of us.
    I'm afraid that whole post has swayed me not a jot.
    Of course it won't - you're angry at the Tories - not without cause and have convinced yourself, as have so many others, that Starmer is moderate centre-left who won't frighten the horses while trhowing you bits of red meat. And you wish to bathe in the warm red glow of supporting a party that cares, that will probably return the the UKto the EU and do all and only nice things. You need to re-read Animal Farm - next time it's never different.
    "angry with the Tories" doesn't begin to cover it.

    Starmer is, I fear moderate centre-left. I suspect he will be far too moderate to achieve much good.

    I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable.

    Casino told us some time ago what his
    salary is; it's a good salary and no doubt well-deserved. Since the government judges that an adult can live on £335 pm, a couple on £525 pm, and a child on £245 pm I suspect Casino will find a way to fund the
    VAT on his daughter's school fees.

    But do you want him to be able to afford it? It sounds to me that your objection is the unfair advantage his daughter will have in life.

    I'll repeat the salient point from my post: "I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable. "
    Because the charitable benefit is from the use of the facilities during weekends and holidays. If the increase in taxes makes that non-viable then charitable benefit is removed.
    As I pointed out earlier, if Charitable status existed only for schools using more of their budget for charitable purposes than they gain from tax relief then the true charities would continue. Those taking the piss could either give up that status and operate as businesses, or start being more generous.
  • Options
    Scott_xP said:

    NEW: Defra has confirmed that proper Border Control Posts will need to be constructed at Northern Ireland ports as part of the UK Govt’s unilateral green lane/ red lane plan. The BCPs will be needed to enforce EU agri-food rules for ‘red lane goods’.
    https://twitter.com/JP_Biz/status/1608131739020595200

    The DUP really have FuckeDUP.
  • Options
    kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,963
    tlg86 said:

    kyf_100 said:

    dixiedean said:

    kyf_100 said:

    tlg86 said:

    FPT:

    felix said:

    Tres said:

    Jonathan said:

    As a few of us have been saying.

    "Starmer has — and this is possible to glimpse despite his opacity — always been quite left-wing. He was to the left of every leader since he was in his twenties. Except Corbyn, because there is nobody to the left of Corbyn. But he was, at least, quite comfortable with Corbyn as leader. The alternative theory posits that this wasn’t play-acting. He didn’t just say that the 2017 manifesto was a foundational document for Labour, he actually meant it. He didn’t just run as a leader from the left — mainstream, not Corbynite, but still the left — that is actually his politics.

    But on becoming leader he understood he couldn’t win an election like that. He’d have to lowball voters. It took him a while to appreciate that, but once he did he was pretty robust about it. He has been focused and committed in his work of reassurance.

    If he were to capture power he would then be able to move the country leftward, with voter assent. He would return to something closer to his natural instinct. And it would not be the left who would feel betrayed."


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/keir-starmer-may-be-more-left-wing-than-he-lets-on-82fwdr2t7

    Yawn. New Labour, New Danger. Seen this every time a Labour leader looks like winning.
    The thing about pooh-poohing the boy who cried wolf is that the wolf did eventually come.

    10 years ago, I was living on about £100 a month after housing, commuting, bills and food and only paying basic rate. I've worked very hard to get where I am now. But, because I now have a six-figure income (and that's only in the last 18 months) Labour sees no difference between me and Elon Musk - despite me having very little equity.

    You can't expect me to want to vote for a party like that. And I won't be alone.
    Please elaborate on how Labour believe you and Elon Musk are the same.
    Labour will view me as the top 1%, the privileged elite, the wealthy, calibrate their political rhetoric to match - the politics of envy - and tax me as highly as they possibly can.

    I have no doubt it will be politically rewarding for them, but I think it will be bad for the country.

    "They can't possibly be worse than this lot" is a potent campaigning line, but - again - it's an emotive one and of course they can.

    They certainly can.
    And so to avoid taxes on income you will vote for a party that is terrified of taxing the capital you don't possess.
    Labour wants to put VAT on private schools.

    My daughter is at an independent prep school that I went to when I was eight years old. It costs a fair bit but we make sacrifices. We don't go on holiday quite as often as we'd like. We don't eat out as much. But it's a tradeoff we're willing to make. Of course, we're not on the breadline, but we don't lead the lifestyle some of our fellow middle-class professionals do - but it's a choice.

    The school was founded in 1936. It only has 210 pupils. It specialises in outdoor education. I acquired a lifelong love of hiking, camping and archery from it. My passion for design and technology too. Some of the teachers who taught me are still there now. The current headmaster is a real brick and works his socks off. He's a good egg. My daughter loves it there. She's settled, has lots of friends and is very happy. Her and her friends virtually skip into school. They play and learn outside every day.

    At weekends and holidays it throws its doors open to schoolkids in the local area, and runs adventure camps for inner city schoolkids. It also runs Chinese and Russian language courses that attract children from all over the region, to learn, facilities they struggle to find elsewhere.

    Labour's policies would target schools like this. We wouldn't be able to afford the increase in the fees. We'd be faced with wrenching our daughter out of a school she loves and her friends - for us, this is very very personal.

    The survival of the school itself would be in question. And, the benefits it offers to children and the wider community would be lost too. And, for what? So we can plough our extra money into consumption and higher house prices instead, and overburden our local state school instead?

    It might put a smile on the faces of some Labour activists but when it comes to the next election and you can't fathom why everyone doesn't think Labour is the best thing since sliced bread and is desperate to vote for them - think of us.
    I'm afraid that whole post has swayed me not a jot.
    Of course it won't - you're angry at the Tories - not without cause and have convinced yourself, as have so many others, that Starmer is moderate centre-left who won't frighten the horses while trhowing you bits of red meat. And you wish to bathe in the warm red glow of supporting a party that cares, that will probably return the the UKto the EU and do all and only nice things. You need to re-read Animal Farm - next time it's never different.
    "angry with the Tories" doesn't begin to cover it.

    Starmer is, I fear moderate centre-left. I suspect he will be far too moderate to achieve much good.

    I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable.

    Casino told us some time ago what his
    salary is; it's a good salary and no doubt well-deserved. Since the government judges that an adult can live on £335 pm, a couple on £525 pm, and a child on £245 pm I suspect Casino will find a way to fund the
    VAT on his daughter's school fees.

    But do you want him to be able to afford it? It sounds to me that your objection is the unfair advantage his daughter will have in life.

    I'll repeat the salient point from my post: "I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable. "
    The question of whether or not it's right to tax private education ultimately revolves around whether or not you think it's a social good or not. We don't have VAT on books, for example, because we want to encourage reading.

    So, are private schools a social good? Well, they reduce the pressure on state schools by allowing parents with the ability to pay to pay, which increases the overall spend per child in state schools. They engage in charitable acts, supporting the community and other educational institutions in and around that community. They increase free choice, giving people more of a say in the way they want their children to be educated. They give kids who might be, for example, bullied or have special needs, an alternative to their local comp. They reduce ridiculous distortions in the housing market, where people pay more to live in relevant catchment areas. All of these sound like net positives so far, and good arguments for zero rating school fees for VAT, the same way books are zero rated.

    But the really perverse thing about Labour's policy is just how much it's going to reduce social mobility. At the moment, you have people like Casino who are making sacrifices to give their children an education they think will be better than the local state school (borne out by lower class sizes, better grades at gcse / a level etc). An instant 20% increase in prices is going to mean a lot of children taken out of school, and also a lot of smaller, less illustrious private schools shutting up shop (look at how many shut up shop during and after the GFC - it's lots!).

    What this means is you'll end up with an even more bifurcated system, where the very rich are still able to send their kids to the "top" public schools, with all the negative "old school tie", "establishment" connotations that comes with. The pool from which the establishment tends to draw its ranks will actually grow smaller and more elitist. Meanwhile all the good things that the so-called lesser private schools do, both directly in terms of community outreach and indirectly in terms of reducing pressure on state schools, will be lost. Net result, a smaller, more elite pool of elitists, with more advantages than everyone else.

    Of course, the real answer to all of this is to make private education undesirable by making state schools so good, nobody feels the need to fork out 30% or more of their post tax income to give their kids a better start in life.

    But I don't hear that from any of the anti-private-school-brigade. No suggestions on how to improve things. No suggestions on how to improve choice for parents, or how to improve educational outcomes for state educated kids.

    All I hear is the steady beat of the old class war drum that wants to create an "us and them" division in society. I wonder why that is.
    Easy.
    We need more funding.
    We lost £571 per pupil last year. We could do a lot with that.
    I don't hear much of that from the pro-private school brigade.
    Of course the funding isn't everything. But it's a necessary start.
    OK, so lets run the numbers on this one, based on a quick google of the numbers.

    There are 615,000 private school places in the UK, with fees averaging £15654 per year.

    If we assume unitary elasticity for a moment, a 20% tax would reduce the number of public school students to 492,000. This would mean the 20% tax would raise an extra £3130 per head, or £1539 million in all.

    Divide that by the number of state school pupils (approx 10.5m), and you get £149.20 more per pupil per year to spend.

    Ah yes, but there's a problem here. Finding places for the other 123,000 former private school students who now need a state school place.

    Average spend per head in the state system was 6970 last year, so you'd need to find an extra 857m just to pay for the extra state places required.

    This would therefore mean you'd actually only be looking at an extra £64.33 spend per pupil.

    And for that, you would be uprooting the lives of 123,000 children, as well as significantly reducing their educational outcomes, and reducing social mobility (due to the increased bifurcation I mentioned in my previous post) all for an extra £64.33 spend per state school pupil.

    The numbers don't add up.
    Thanks for this, interesting to see some simple estimates.

    Trying to model the impact of such a policy is tricky. On the one hand, private education might be resilient to such a tax hike. Most people might just make more sacrifices to keep paying the fees.

    On the other hand, there might be a tipping point. If demand falls enough, many schools might become unviable and close. The options for private education would fall meaning more don't bother with it even if they were willing to pay the increased fees.

    Also, I suspect the effect might take time to come through. If you're already sending your kid to private school, you will probably do what it takes to keep them going. But, if you're in the position my sister is, you might decide not to bother sending them in the first place.
    Yep, it's a super simple back of a disposable vape packet calculation based on unitary elasticity, as you say, if private school education turns out to be inelastic, you can get more money for the state, but even then it's a small amount per pupil. And the loss of charitable status for private schools means no more community outreach work, which is probably worth more than the £64-£150 a head you save anyway.

    As you say, you would probably also have a situation where people with kids with just 3 years left to go would pay the extra due to the sunk costs, but those with five year olds might decide they can't afford the whole thing from the start, so it would take a while for changes to filter through, with some of the smaller and weaker private schools going bust over time, leading to an overall reduction in places, that might further increase pressure on the state system.

    Lots of unknowns - but what I was trying to prove was that really, if we're looking for ways to improve funding for state schools and improve the educational outcomes of state school children, there are better ways of going at it than going after parents who are doing the state a favour by paying their taxes to educate everyone else's children, then paying school fees on top of that to educate their own privately.

    So if we can demonstrate it's not about raising money, it's about sending a message, that says a lot about the people supporting the policy.
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,904
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Is private healthcare subject to VAT? If yes, then private schools should be too. Both are provided to all by the state, so taking the private option is a choice.
    Fundamentally I believe we pay too little tax for the services we want. The harder question is how you levy those taxes in a fair way. Personally I’d prefer flat taxation. The more you earn, the more you pay, but no stupid cliff edges and marginal rates. Seems simple to me, so there must be something wrong with it.

    Private healthcare is currently VAT exempt I believe but, like private education, should be VATable imo.
    VAT is payable on cosmetic surgery, and a few other niche areas.

    VAT is always a bit daft, hence cakes vs biscuits, whether a pasty is still warm etc.

    A reasonable approach is to require a school to spend more of its income on charitable acts than it saves in VAT in order to maintain charitable status.
    Education is a charitable purpose according to the Charity commission
    Yes, but parents cannot deduct school fees against income tax. It is not a charitable transaction, it is fee for service.
    I know, but you said "a school should be required to spend more of its income on Charitable acts than it saves in VAT".

    I was just pointing out they already do as the act of education is a Charitable purpose. So almost all their expenditure is Charitable. So your idea wouldn't work.
  • Options
    BalrogBalrog Posts: 207

    FYI I went to day schools, well mixed technically but mostly all day pupils, parents targeted them specifically over Wellington, Marlborough etc because they were day

    My daughter went to a state boarding school on the Surrey/Berkshire border and then decided she wanted to go to one of the schools you identified because they were better at computing A level primarily. It wasn't a good experience as trying to break into established cliques didn't work. She would have been happier/better not moving.
  • Options
    DJ41DJ41 Posts: 792
    edited December 2022
    Stats: about 70000 children board in Britain in private schools, of whom about 26000 are from non-British families who live abroad. About 5000 board at state schools.

    There are about 9.5 million school pupils. So about 0.46% of British children board. I'm told 37% of the current cabinet boarded - so those who boarded are about 80 times overrepresented.

    Problem? What problem? Lol.
  • Options
    DougSealDougSeal Posts: 11,295

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Is private healthcare subject to VAT? If yes, then private schools should be too. Both are provided to all by the state, so taking the private option is a choice.
    Fundamentally I believe we pay too little tax for the services we want. The harder question is how you levy those taxes in a fair way. Personally I’d prefer flat taxation. The more you earn, the more you pay, but no stupid cliff edges and marginal rates. Seems simple to me, so there must be something wrong with it.

    Private healthcare is currently VAT exempt I believe but, like private education, should be VATable imo.
    VAT is payable on cosmetic surgery, and a few other niche areas.

    VAT is always a bit daft, hence cakes vs biscuits, whether a pasty is still warm etc.

    A reasonable approach is to require a school to spend more of its income on charitable acts than it saves in VAT in order to maintain charitable status.
    Education is a charitable purpose according to the Charity commission
    Yes, but parents cannot deduct school fees against income tax. It is not a charitable transaction, it is fee for service.
    I know, but you said "a school should be required to spend more of its income on Charitable acts than it saves in VAT".

    I was just pointing out they already do as the act of education is a Charitable purpose. So almost all their expenditure is Charitable. So your idea wouldn't work.
    Fixing that would just require an amendment to the Charities Act 2011 to exclude educational services provided for a fee.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,025
    Leon said:

    We would be wise to forbid flights from China, and entry to Chinese nationals, for a few months

    The Chinese gave us this virus, from their lab, they then lied about it in multiple ways, exported it around the world (quite deliberately), so let them suck on its nasty fag end, alone

    Last time we didn't do anything, unlike most countries.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,843

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Is private healthcare subject to VAT? If yes, then private schools should be too. Both are provided to all by the state, so taking the private option is a choice.
    Fundamentally I believe we pay too little tax for the services we want. The harder question is how you levy those taxes in a fair way. Personally I’d prefer flat taxation. The more you earn, the more you pay, but no stupid cliff edges and marginal rates. Seems simple to me, so there must be something wrong with it.

    Private healthcare is currently VAT exempt I believe but, like private education, should be VATable imo.
    VAT is payable on cosmetic surgery, and a few other niche areas.

    VAT is always a bit daft, hence cakes vs biscuits, whether a pasty is still warm etc.

    A reasonable approach is to require a school to spend more of its income on charitable acts than it saves in VAT in order to maintain charitable status.
    Education is a charitable purpose according to the Charity commission
    Yes, but parents cannot deduct school fees against income tax. It is not a charitable transaction, it is fee for service.
    I know, but you said "a school should be required to spend more of its income on Charitable acts than it saves in VAT".

    I was just pointing out they already do as the act of education is a Charitable purpose. So almost all their expenditure is Charitable. So your idea wouldn't work.
    If they could prove their bursaries etc were over 20% of fee income then they could keep charitable status.
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,335
    Leon said:

    We would be wise to forbid flights from China, and entry to Chinese nationals, for a few months

    The Chinese gave us this virus, from their lab, they then lied about it in multiple ways, exported it around the world (quite deliberately), so let them suck on its nasty fag end, alone

    How many flights from China arrive in the U.K. each day? How many extra people with covid to add to the over a million already here?
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,843
    DougSeal said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Is private healthcare subject to VAT? If yes, then private schools should be too. Both are provided to all by the state, so taking the private option is a choice.
    Fundamentally I believe we pay too little tax for the services we want. The harder question is how you levy those taxes in a fair way. Personally I’d prefer flat taxation. The more you earn, the more you pay, but no stupid cliff edges and marginal rates. Seems simple to me, so there must be something wrong with it.

    Private healthcare is currently VAT exempt I believe but, like private education, should be VATable imo.
    VAT is payable on cosmetic surgery, and a few other niche areas.

    VAT is always a bit daft, hence cakes vs biscuits, whether a pasty is still warm etc.

    A reasonable approach is to require a school to spend more of its income on charitable acts than it saves in VAT in order to maintain charitable status.
    Education is a charitable purpose according to the Charity commission
    Yes, but parents cannot deduct school fees against income tax. It is not a charitable transaction, it is fee for service.
    I know, but you said "a school should be required to spend more of its income on Charitable acts than it saves in VAT".

    I was just pointing out they already do as the act of education is a Charitable purpose. So almost all their expenditure is Charitable. So your idea wouldn't work.
    Fixing that would just require an amendment to the Charities Act 2011 to exclude educational services provided for a fee.
    Parents who stop paying fees soon find their schools are not educating their children out of charity!
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,464
    DougSeal said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Is private healthcare subject to VAT? If yes, then private schools should be too. Both are provided to all by the state, so taking the private option is a choice.
    Fundamentally I believe we pay too little tax for the services we want. The harder question is how you levy those taxes in a fair way. Personally I’d prefer flat taxation. The more you earn, the more you pay, but no stupid cliff edges and marginal rates. Seems simple to me, so there must be something wrong with it.

    Private healthcare is currently VAT exempt I believe but, like private education, should be VATable imo.
    VAT is payable on cosmetic surgery, and a few other niche areas.

    VAT is always a bit daft, hence cakes vs biscuits, whether a pasty is still warm etc.

    A reasonable approach is to require a school to spend more of its income on charitable acts than it saves in VAT in order to maintain charitable status.
    Education is a charitable purpose according to the Charity commission
    Yes, but parents cannot deduct school fees against income tax. It is not a charitable transaction, it is fee for service.
    I know, but you said "a school should be required to spend more of its income on Charitable acts than it saves in VAT".

    I was just pointing out they already do as the act of education is a Charitable purpose. So almost all their expenditure is Charitable. So your idea wouldn't work.
    Fixing that would just require an amendment to the Charities Act 2011 to exclude educational services provided for a fee.
    You mean, like university courses?
  • Options
    Balrog said:

    FYI I went to day schools, well mixed technically but mostly all day pupils, parents targeted them specifically over Wellington, Marlborough etc because they were day

    My daughter went to a state boarding school on the Surrey/Berkshire border and then decided she wanted to go to one of the schools you identified because they were better at computing A level primarily. It wasn't a good experience as trying to break into established cliques didn't work. She would have been happier/better not moving.
    It's funny you say that as one of the reasons I left was that their offering for Computer Science - which I wanted to do at Uni - was basically non-existent. Long term it didn't impact me much as I dropped out of uni anyway (and to be honest I maintain that Computer Science does not itself make you good at Software Engineering).
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,104

    Is there much evidence private schools really reduce pressure on the state system? I would argue the state system has been gutted to such a degree that it can't support people as it should - but that isn't because parents are putting their kids in private schools.

    The idea parents do it to relieve pressure on the state system is clearly absurd.

    I think you are muddling motive and outcome. Parents do it for their own reasons (unlikely, as you say, to be to relieve pressure on the state system).

    But if the state system had to accommodate an additional cohort of children - increasing the school population by about 7.5% or 2 more kids in a class of 30 - they might struggle. (And presumably this would be concentrated as I assume smaller private schools are not geographically go calmly evenly spread)

    So the motive isn’t to reduce pressure, but the outcome of closing them would be to reduce capacity in the education system and hence increase pressure on the state provision
  • Options
    Why don't we all get a tax rebate on our uni fees?
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,572
    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    We would be wise to forbid flights from China, and entry to Chinese nationals, for a few months

    The Chinese gave us this virus, from their lab, they then lied about it in multiple ways, exported it around the world (quite deliberately), so let them suck on its nasty fag end, alone

    Last time we didn't do anything, unlike most countries.
    Trump was slated as a racist for doing what Biden has just done: impose specific restraints on Chinese visitors

    "In late January, the Trump administration implemented a travel restriction from China, where the coronavirus originated.

    Some on the left described the move as a racist or xenophobic ploy aimed at punishing a country that Trump has clashed with"

    lol. The Left is a hyena's nest of pathetic hypocrisy

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/498350-biden-trumps-coronavirus-response-has-been-nakedly-xenophobic/
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,843
    ydoethur said:

    DougSeal said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Is private healthcare subject to VAT? If yes, then private schools should be too. Both are provided to all by the state, so taking the private option is a choice.
    Fundamentally I believe we pay too little tax for the services we want. The harder question is how you levy those taxes in a fair way. Personally I’d prefer flat taxation. The more you earn, the more you pay, but no stupid cliff edges and marginal rates. Seems simple to me, so there must be something wrong with it.

    Private healthcare is currently VAT exempt I believe but, like private education, should be VATable imo.
    VAT is payable on cosmetic surgery, and a few other niche areas.

    VAT is always a bit daft, hence cakes vs biscuits, whether a pasty is still warm etc.

    A reasonable approach is to require a school to spend more of its income on charitable acts than it saves in VAT in order to maintain charitable status.
    Education is a charitable purpose according to the Charity commission
    Yes, but parents cannot deduct school fees against income tax. It is not a charitable transaction, it is fee for service.
    I know, but you said "a school should be required to spend more of its income on Charitable acts than it saves in VAT".

    I was just pointing out they already do as the act of education is a Charitable purpose. So almost all their expenditure is Charitable. So your idea wouldn't work.
    Fixing that would just require an amendment to the Charities Act 2011 to exclude educational services provided for a fee.
    You mean, like university courses?
    Personally, I think all universities should be privatised, and happy for them to charge VAT.
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,104

    There's certainly an argument for giving a tax exemption for poorer parents sending their children to private school.

    Perhaps VAT is the wrong tax to add, something that scales with wealth is quite a good idea perhaps.

    Blair abolished the assisted places scheme
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,163
    I wasn’t even aware that private schooling was VAT exempt until this story emerged, I suspect there are millions like me.

    It seems silly that it is VAT exempt, although not a policy I’ll lose any sleep on either way.
  • Options
    Here's an idea.

    Exempt current students from paying VAT and only apply it to new students.
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,104
    kyf_100 said:

    dixiedean said:

    kyf_100 said:

    tlg86 said:

    FPT:

    felix said:

    Tres said:

    Jonathan said:

    As a few of us have been saying.

    "Starmer has — and this is possible to glimpse despite his opacity — always been quite left-wing. He was to the left of every leader since he was in his twenties. Except Corbyn, because there is nobody to the left of Corbyn. But he was, at least, quite comfortable with Corbyn as leader. The alternative theory posits that this wasn’t play-acting. He didn’t just say that the 2017 manifesto was a foundational document for Labour, he actually meant it. He didn’t just run as a leader from the left — mainstream, not Corbynite, but still the left — that is actually his politics.

    But on becoming leader he understood he couldn’t win an election like that. He’d have to lowball voters. It took him a while to appreciate that, but once he did he was pretty robust about it. He has been focused and committed in his work of reassurance.

    If he were to capture power he would then be able to move the country leftward, with voter assent. He would return to something closer to his natural instinct. And it would not be the left who would feel betrayed."


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/keir-starmer-may-be-more-left-wing-than-he-lets-on-82fwdr2t7

    Yawn. New Labour, New Danger. Seen this every time a Labour leader looks like winning.
    The thing about pooh-poohing the boy who cried wolf is that the wolf did eventually come.

    10 years ago, I was living on about £100 a month after housing, commuting, bills and food and only paying basic rate. I've worked very hard to get where I am now. But, because I now have a six-figure income (and that's only in the last 18 months) Labour sees no difference between me and Elon Musk - despite me having very little equity.

    You can't expect me to want to vote for a party like that. And I won't be alone.
    Please elaborate on how Labour believe you and Elon Musk are the same.
    Labour will view me as the top 1%, the privileged elite, the wealthy, calibrate their political rhetoric to match - the politics of envy - and tax me as highly as they possibly can.

    I have no doubt it will be politically rewarding for them, but I think it will be bad for the country.

    "They can't possibly be worse than this lot" is a potent campaigning line, but - again - it's an emotive one and of course they can.

    They certainly can.
    And so to avoid taxes on income you will vote for a party that is terrified of taxing the capital you don't possess.
    Labour wants to put VAT on private schools.

    My daughter is at an independent prep school that I went to when I was eight years old. It costs a fair bit but we make sacrifices. We don't go on holiday quite as often as we'd like. We don't eat out as much. But it's a tradeoff we're willing to make. Of course, we're not on the breadline, but we don't lead the lifestyle some of our fellow middle-class professionals do - but it's a choice.

    The school was founded in 1936. It only has 210 pupils. It specialises in outdoor education. I acquired a lifelong love of hiking, camping and archery from it. My passion for design and technology too. Some of the teachers who taught me are still there now. The current headmaster is a real brick and works his socks off. He's a good egg. My daughter loves it there. She's settled, has lots of friends and is very happy. Her and her friends virtually skip into school. They play and learn outside every day.

    At weekends and holidays it throws its doors open to schoolkids in the local area, and runs adventure camps for inner city schoolkids. It also runs Chinese and Russian language courses that attract children from all over the region, to learn, facilities they struggle to find elsewhere.

    Labour's policies would target schools like this. We wouldn't be able to afford the increase in the fees. We'd be faced with wrenching our daughter out of a school she loves and her friends - for us, this is very very personal.

    The survival of the school itself would be in question. And, the benefits it offers to children and the wider community would be lost too. And, for what? So we can plough our extra money into consumption and higher house prices instead, and overburden our local state school instead?

    It might put a smile on the faces of some Labour activists but when it comes to the next election and you can't fathom why everyone doesn't think Labour is the best thing since sliced bread and is desperate to vote for them - think of us.
    I'm afraid that whole post has swayed me not a jot.
    Of course it won't - you're angry at the Tories - not without cause and have convinced yourself, as have so many others, that Starmer is moderate centre-left who won't frighten the horses while trhowing you bits of red meat. And you wish to bathe in the warm red glow of supporting a party that cares, that will probably return the the UKto the EU and do all and only nice things. You need to re-read Animal Farm - next time it's never different.
    "angry with the Tories" doesn't begin to cover it.

    Starmer is, I fear moderate centre-left. I suspect he will be far too moderate to achieve much good.

    I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable.

    Casino told us some time ago what his
    salary is; it's a good salary and no doubt well-deserved. Since the government judges that an adult can live on £335 pm, a couple on £525 pm, and a child on £245 pm I suspect Casino will find a way to fund the
    VAT on his daughter's school fees.

    But do you want him to be able to afford it? It sounds to me that your objection is the unfair advantage his daughter will have in life.

    I'll repeat the salient point from my post: "I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable. "
    The question of whether or not it's right to tax private education ultimately revolves around whether or not you think it's a social good or not. We don't have VAT on books, for example, because we want to encourage reading.

    So, are private schools a social good? Well, they reduce the pressure on state schools by allowing parents with the ability to pay to pay, which increases the overall spend per child in state schools. They engage in charitable acts, supporting the community and other educational institutions in and around that community. They increase free choice, giving people more of a say in the way they want their children to be educated. They give kids who might be, for example, bullied or have special needs, an alternative to their local comp. They reduce ridiculous distortions in the housing market, where people pay more to live in relevant catchment areas. All of these sound like net positives so far, and good arguments for zero rating school fees for VAT, the same way books are zero rated.

    But the really perverse thing about Labour's policy is just how much it's going to reduce social mobility. At the moment, you have people like Casino who are making sacrifices to give their children an education they think will be better than the local state school (borne out by lower class sizes, better grades at gcse / a level etc). An instant 20% increase in prices is going to mean a lot of children taken out of school, and also a lot of smaller, less illustrious private schools shutting up shop (look at how many shut up shop during and after the GFC - it's lots!).

    What this means is you'll end up with an even more bifurcated system, where the very rich are still able to send their kids to the "top" public schools, with all the negative "old school tie", "establishment" connotations that comes with. The pool from which the establishment tends to draw its ranks will actually grow smaller and more elitist. Meanwhile all the good things that the so-called lesser private schools do, both directly in terms of community outreach and indirectly in terms of reducing pressure on state schools, will be lost. Net result, a smaller, more elite pool of elitists, with more advantages than everyone else.

    Of course, the real answer to all of this is to make private education undesirable by making state schools so good, nobody feels the need to fork out 30% or more of their post tax income to give their kids a better start in life.

    But I don't hear that from any of the anti-private-school-brigade. No suggestions on how to improve things. No suggestions on how to improve choice for parents, or how to improve educational outcomes for state educated kids.

    All I hear is the steady beat of the old class war drum that wants to create an "us and them" division in society. I wonder why that is.
    Easy.
    We need more funding.
    We lost £571 per pupil last year. We could do a lot with that.
    I don't hear much of that from the pro-private school brigade.
    Of course the funding isn't everything. But it's a necessary start.
    OK, so lets run the numbers on this one, based on a quick google of the numbers.

    There are 615,000 private school places in the UK, with fees averaging £15654 per year.

    If we assume unitary elasticity for a moment, a 20% tax would reduce the number of public school students to 492,000. This would mean the 20% tax would raise an extra £3130 per head, or £1539 million in all.

    Divide that by the number of state school pupils (approx 10.5m), and you get £149.20 more per pupil per year to spend.

    Ah yes, but there's a problem here. Finding places for the other 123,000 former private school students who now need a state school place.

    Average spend per head in the state system was 6970 last year, so you'd need to find an extra 857m just to pay for the extra state places required.

    This would therefore mean you'd actually only be looking at an extra £64.33 spend per pupil.

    And for that, you would be uprooting the lives of 123,000 children, as well as significantly reducing their educational outcomes, and reducing social mobility (due to the increased bifurcation I mentioned in my previous post) all for an extra £64.33 spend per state school pupil.

    The numbers don't add up.
    You’d only have to fund the marginal cost of the new pupils (no new classrooms for them!) so the numbers aren’t quite that bad. But you are right in principle.
  • Options
    DougSealDougSeal Posts: 11,295
    ydoethur said:

    DougSeal said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Is private healthcare subject to VAT? If yes, then private schools should be too. Both are provided to all by the state, so taking the private option is a choice.
    Fundamentally I believe we pay too little tax for the services we want. The harder question is how you levy those taxes in a fair way. Personally I’d prefer flat taxation. The more you earn, the more you pay, but no stupid cliff edges and marginal rates. Seems simple to me, so there must be something wrong with it.

    Private healthcare is currently VAT exempt I believe but, like private education, should be VATable imo.
    VAT is payable on cosmetic surgery, and a few other niche areas.

    VAT is always a bit daft, hence cakes vs biscuits, whether a pasty is still warm etc.

    A reasonable approach is to require a school to spend more of its income on charitable acts than it saves in VAT in order to maintain charitable status.
    Education is a charitable purpose according to the Charity commission
    Yes, but parents cannot deduct school fees against income tax. It is not a charitable transaction, it is fee for service.
    I know, but you said "a school should be required to spend more of its income on Charitable acts than it saves in VAT".

    I was just pointing out they already do as the act of education is a Charitable purpose. So almost all their expenditure is Charitable. So your idea wouldn't work.
    Fixing that would just require an amendment to the Charities Act 2011 to exclude educational services provided for a fee.
    You mean, like university courses?
    Parliamentary drafting is an art that is ill reflected in a short post on the world’s most pedantic message board that sought to make a general point that laws can be changed.
  • Options
    Dixie Dean's record is going this season if Haaland remains fit isn't it?
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,572

    Leon said:

    We would be wise to forbid flights from China, and entry to Chinese nationals, for a few months

    The Chinese gave us this virus, from their lab, they then lied about it in multiple ways, exported it around the world (quite deliberately), so let them suck on its nasty fag end, alone

    How many flights from China arrive in the U.K. each day? How many extra people with covid to add to the over a million already here?
    For a scientist you are alarmingly low-watt

    China is basically a 1.4bn strong human petri dish, in the global lab, right now - a petri dish given the task of finding out if Covid can conjure up another dangerous vaccine evasive variant - when allowed to assault 1.4bn unprotected people in a matter of a few weeks

    Hopefully China will prove that our fears are overblown, but why err on the side of generosity to Chinese tourists and visitors, given what China has done to itself and to the world, these last three years?

    I swear there are people in the UK who would rather we all die, than that they might be perceived as just 5% "racist"
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,464
    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    DougSeal said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Is private healthcare subject to VAT? If yes, then private schools should be too. Both are provided to all by the state, so taking the private option is a choice.
    Fundamentally I believe we pay too little tax for the services we want. The harder question is how you levy those taxes in a fair way. Personally I’d prefer flat taxation. The more you earn, the more you pay, but no stupid cliff edges and marginal rates. Seems simple to me, so there must be something wrong with it.

    Private healthcare is currently VAT exempt I believe but, like private education, should be VATable imo.
    VAT is payable on cosmetic surgery, and a few other niche areas.

    VAT is always a bit daft, hence cakes vs biscuits, whether a pasty is still warm etc.

    A reasonable approach is to require a school to spend more of its income on charitable acts than it saves in VAT in order to maintain charitable status.
    Education is a charitable purpose according to the Charity commission
    Yes, but parents cannot deduct school fees against income tax. It is not a charitable transaction, it is fee for service.
    I know, but you said "a school should be required to spend more of its income on Charitable acts than it saves in VAT".

    I was just pointing out they already do as the act of education is a Charitable purpose. So almost all their expenditure is Charitable. So your idea wouldn't work.
    Fixing that would just require an amendment to the Charities Act 2011 to exclude educational services provided for a fee.
    You mean, like university courses?
    Personally, I think all universities should be privatised, and happy for them to charge VAT.
    They are privatised. Well, owned by charitable trusts, anyway.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,025

    Why don't we all get a tax rebate on our uni fees?

    What about the majority who don't go to university?
  • Options
    Andy_JS said:

    Why don't we all get a tax rebate on our uni fees?

    What about the majority who don't go to university?
    What about the majority that don't go to private schools?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,464
    DougSeal said:

    ydoethur said:

    DougSeal said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Is private healthcare subject to VAT? If yes, then private schools should be too. Both are provided to all by the state, so taking the private option is a choice.
    Fundamentally I believe we pay too little tax for the services we want. The harder question is how you levy those taxes in a fair way. Personally I’d prefer flat taxation. The more you earn, the more you pay, but no stupid cliff edges and marginal rates. Seems simple to me, so there must be something wrong with it.

    Private healthcare is currently VAT exempt I believe but, like private education, should be VATable imo.
    VAT is payable on cosmetic surgery, and a few other niche areas.

    VAT is always a bit daft, hence cakes vs biscuits, whether a pasty is still warm etc.

    A reasonable approach is to require a school to spend more of its income on charitable acts than it saves in VAT in order to maintain charitable status.
    Education is a charitable purpose according to the Charity commission
    Yes, but parents cannot deduct school fees against income tax. It is not a charitable transaction, it is fee for service.
    I know, but you said "a school should be required to spend more of its income on Charitable acts than it saves in VAT".

    I was just pointing out they already do as the act of education is a Charitable purpose. So almost all their expenditure is Charitable. So your idea wouldn't work.
    Fixing that would just require an amendment to the Charities Act 2011 to exclude educational services provided for a fee.
    You mean, like university courses?
    Parliamentary drafting is an art that is ill reflected in a short post on the world’s most pedantic message board that sought to make a general point that laws can be changed.
    Parliamentary drafting is an art that is lost, if it ever existed.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,843

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Is private healthcare subject to VAT? If yes, then private schools should be too. Both are provided to all by the state, so taking the private option is a choice.
    Fundamentally I believe we pay too little tax for the services we want. The harder question is how you levy those taxes in a fair way. Personally I’d prefer flat taxation. The more you earn, the more you pay, but no stupid cliff edges and marginal rates. Seems simple to me, so there must be something wrong with it.

    Private healthcare is currently VAT exempt I believe but, like private education, should be VATable imo.
    VAT is payable on cosmetic surgery, and a few other niche areas.

    VAT is always a bit daft, hence cakes vs biscuits, whether a pasty is still warm etc.

    A reasonable approach is to require a school to spend more of its income on charitable acts than it saves in VAT in order to maintain charitable status.
    Education is a charitable purpose according to the Charity commission
    Yes, but parents cannot deduct school fees against income tax. It is not a charitable transaction, it is fee for service.
    I know, but you said "a school should be required to spend more of its income on Charitable acts than it saves in VAT".

    I was just pointing out they already do as the act of education is a Charitable purpose. So almost all their expenditure is Charitable. So your idea wouldn't work.
    To quote Labour's 2017 manifesto:

    "To aid attainment, we will introduce free school meals for all primary school children, paid for by removing the VAT exemption on private school fees."

    And 2019:

    "We will close the tax loopholes enjoyed by elite private schools and use that money to improve the lives of all children, and we will ask the Social Justice Commission to advise on integrating private schools and creating a comprehensive education system"

    Were these unworkeable ideas when Corbyn proposed them?, or only now that Starmer wants to keep them?
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,209

    Dixie Dean's record is going this season if Haaland remains fit isn't it?

    Flat track bully.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,025

    Leon said:

    We would be wise to forbid flights from China, and entry to Chinese nationals, for a few months

    The Chinese gave us this virus, from their lab, they then lied about it in multiple ways, exported it around the world (quite deliberately), so let them suck on its nasty fag end, alone

    How many flights from China arrive in the U.K. each day? How many extra people with covid to add to the over a million already here?
    To be in favour of domestic lockdowns but against preventing people travelling between countries where many people have Covid is a combination I will never understand.
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,104

    tlg86 said:

    FPT:

    felix said:

    Tres said:

    Jonathan said:

    As a few of us have been saying.

    "Starmer has — and this is possible to glimpse despite his opacity — always been quite left-wing. He was to the left of every leader since he was in his twenties. Except Corbyn, because there is nobody to the left of Corbyn. But he was, at least, quite comfortable with Corbyn as leader. The alternative theory posits that this wasn’t play-acting. He didn’t just say that the 2017 manifesto was a foundational document for Labour, he actually meant it. He didn’t just run as a leader from the left — mainstream, not Corbynite, but still the left — that is actually his politics.

    But on becoming leader he understood he couldn’t win an election like that. He’d have to lowball voters. It took him a while to appreciate that, but once he did he was pretty robust about it. He has been focused and committed in his work of reassurance.

    If he were to capture power he would then be able to move the country leftward, with voter assent. He would return to something closer to his natural instinct. And it would not be the left who would feel betrayed."


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/keir-starmer-may-be-more-left-wing-than-he-lets-on-82fwdr2t7

    Yawn. New Labour, New Danger. Seen this every time a Labour leader looks like winning.
    The thing about pooh-poohing the boy who cried wolf is that the wolf did eventually come.

    10 years ago, I was living on about £100 a month after housing, commuting, bills and food and only paying basic rate. I've worked very hard to get where I am now. But, because I now have a six-figure income (and that's only in the last 18 months) Labour sees no difference between me and Elon Musk - despite me having very little equity.

    You can't expect me to want to vote for a party like that. And I won't be alone.
    Please elaborate on how Labour believe you and Elon Musk are the same.
    Labour will view me as the top 1%, the privileged elite, the wealthy, calibrate their political rhetoric to match - the politics of envy - and tax me as highly as they possibly can.

    I have no doubt it will be politically rewarding for them, but I think it will be bad for the country.

    "They can't possibly be worse than this lot" is a potent campaigning line, but - again - it's an emotive one and of course they can.

    They certainly can.
    And so to avoid taxes on income you will vote for a party that is terrified of taxing the capital you don't possess.
    Labour wants to put VAT on private schools.

    My daughter is at an independent prep school that I went to when I was eight years old. It costs a fair bit but we make sacrifices. We don't go on holiday quite as often as we'd like. We don't eat out as much. But it's a tradeoff we're willing to make. Of course, we're not on the breadline, but we don't lead the lifestyle some of our fellow middle-class professionals do - but it's a choice.

    The school was founded in 1936. It only has 210 pupils. It specialises in outdoor education. I acquired a lifelong love of hiking, camping and archery from it. My passion for design and technology too. Some of the teachers who taught me are still there now. The current headmaster is a real brick and works his socks off. He's a good egg. My daughter loves it there. She's settled, has lots of friends and is very happy. Her and her friends virtually skip into school. They play and learn outside every day.

    At weekends and holidays it throws its doors open to schoolkids in the local area, and runs adventure camps for inner city schoolkids. It also runs Chinese and Russian language courses that attract children from all over the region, to learn, facilities they struggle to find elsewhere.

    Labour's policies would target schools like this. We wouldn't be able to afford the increase in the fees. We'd be faced with wrenching our daughter out of a school she loves and her friends - for us, this is very very personal.

    The survival of the school itself would be in question. And, the benefits it offers to children and the wider community would be lost too. And, for what? So we can plough our extra money into consumption and higher house prices instead, and overburden our local state school instead?

    It might put a smile on the faces of some Labour activists but when it comes to the next election and you can't fathom why everyone doesn't think Labour is the best thing since sliced bread and is desperate to vote for them - think of us.
    I'm afraid that whole post has swayed me not a jot.
    Of course it won't - you're angry at the Tories - not without cause and have convinced yourself, as have so many others, that Starmer is moderate centre-left who won't frighten the horses while trhowing you bits of red meat. And you wish to bathe in the warm red glow of supporting a party that cares, that will probably return the the UKto the EU and do all and only nice things. You need to re-read Animal Farm - next time it's never different.
    "angry with the Tories" doesn't begin to cover it.

    Starmer is, I fear moderate centre-left. I suspect he will be far too moderate to achieve much good.

    I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable.

    Casino told us some time ago what his
    salary is; it's a good salary and no doubt well-deserved. Since the government judges that an adult can live on £335 pm, a couple on £525 pm, and a child on £245 pm I suspect Casino will find a way to fund the
    VAT on his daughter's school fees.

    But do you want him to be able to afford it? It sounds to me that your objection is the unfair advantage his daughter will have in life.

    I'll repeat the salient point from my post: "I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable. "
    Because the charitable benefit is from the use of the facilities during weekends and holidays. If the increase in taxes makes that non-viable then charitable benefit is removed.
    Eton had a new sports hall built whilst the school around the corner was asking for donations to buy teaching supplies. How is that fair
    Because it was privately funded by donations from taxed income (I assume).

    The charitable aspect - and Eton is great about this - is from sharing the facilities with local schools and residents for no cost. So those kids get access to facilities that they wouldn’t otherwise have in the state sector.


  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,577
    HYUFD said:

    Yet we were told earlier in the Year by OGH and others that removing Boris would restore Tory fortunes, instead they have gone further back.

    However at least 25% is better than the 22% they were polling under Truss before Sunak replaced her as leader and PM. 6% for RefUK to squeeze too

    https://www.omnisis.co.uk/media/1138/vi-006-bring-back-boris-tabs-22102022.xlsx

    It seems very unlikely that the passage of time alone would not have restored 3% to Truss's Government. Frankly I think Truss's Government would have been disappointed only to have seen a Sunak level recovery by now.

    Regarding Sunak's leadership ratings, there may be a small effect of people not wishing to appear racist, and therefore upping their rating a bit. This effect if it exists would I think be seen in phone polls more.
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,335
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    We would be wise to forbid flights from China, and entry to Chinese nationals, for a few months

    The Chinese gave us this virus, from their lab, they then lied about it in multiple ways, exported it around the world (quite deliberately), so let them suck on its nasty fag end, alone

    How many flights from China arrive in the U.K. each day? How many extra people with covid to add to the over a million already here?
    For a scientist you are alarmingly low-watt

    China is basically a 1.4bn strong human petri dish, in the global lab, right now - a petri dish given the task of finding out if Covid can conjure up another dangerous vaccine evasive variant - when allowed to assault 1.4bn unprotected people in a matter of a few weeks

    Hopefully China will prove that our fears are overblown, but why err on the side of generosity to Chinese tourists and visitors, given what China has done to itself and to the world, these last three years?

    I swear there are people in the UK who would rather we all die, than that they might be perceived as just 5% "racist"
    Covid is doing the experiments right round the world anyway. You are falling into the suppression trap again. The most dangerous people are not Chinese peasants, they are the immune compromised western patients who undergo lengthy covid infections, and those being treated with mabs, now being shown to provoke mutations (hardly suprising really - treatment puts evolutionary pressure on virus, result obvious).
    There really is little point stopping Chinese travellers today. There would have been in early 2020.
  • Options
    DougSealDougSeal Posts: 11,295
    Leon said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    We would be wise to forbid flights from China, and entry to Chinese nationals, for a few months

    The Chinese gave us this virus, from their lab, they then lied about it in multiple ways, exported it around the world (quite deliberately), so let them suck on its nasty fag end, alone

    Last time we didn't do anything, unlike most countries.
    Trump was slated as a racist for doing what Biden has just done: impose specific restraints on Chinese visitors

    "In late January, the Trump administration implemented a travel restriction from China, where the coronavirus originated.

    Some on the left described the move as a racist or xenophobic ploy aimed at punishing a country that Trump has clashed with"

    lol. The Left is a hyena's nest of pathetic hypocrisy

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/498350-biden-trumps-coronavirus-response-has-been-nakedly-xenophobic/
    Remind me who chants "lock her up" at Hillary Clinton for her handling of sensitive documents in tandem with outrage over an FBI seizure of classified documents at the man who leads them, repeats unsubstantiated concerns over election fraud while attempting to overthrow the democratic process, assert that "Blue Lives Matter" except during the Jan. 6 insurrection, claim that invoking the Fifth amendment means a person is definitely guilty, except when they do it? You sure that’s the Left?

  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,335
    tlg86 said:

    Dixie Dean's record is going this season if Haaland remains fit isn't it?

    Flat track bully.
    I disagree (I suspect your are joking😘!). Harland is the real deal. We have not a striker like this, as good as this for a very long time, if at all.
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,104
    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    FPT:

    felix said:

    Tres said:

    Jonathan said:

    As a few of us have been saying.

    "Starmer has — and this is possible to glimpse despite his opacity — always been quite left-wing. He was to the left of every leader since he was in his twenties. Except Corbyn, because there is nobody to the left of Corbyn. But he was, at least, quite comfortable with Corbyn as leader. The alternative theory posits that this wasn’t play-acting. He didn’t just say that the 2017 manifesto was a foundational document for Labour, he actually meant it. He didn’t just run as a leader from the left — mainstream, not Corbynite, but still the left — that is actually his politics.

    But on becoming leader he understood he couldn’t win an election like that. He’d have to lowball voters. It took him a while to appreciate that, but once he did he was pretty robust about it. He has been focused and committed in his work of reassurance.

    If he were to capture power he would then be able to move the country leftward, with voter assent. He would return to something closer to his natural instinct. And it would not be the left who would feel betrayed."


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/keir-starmer-may-be-more-left-wing-than-he-lets-on-82fwdr2t7

    Yawn. New Labour, New Danger. Seen this every time a Labour leader looks like winning.
    The thing about pooh-poohing the boy who cried wolf is that the wolf did eventually come.

    10 years ago, I was living on about £100 a month after housing, commuting, bills and food and only paying basic rate. I've worked very hard to get where I am now. But, because I now have a six-figure income (and that's only in the last 18 months) Labour sees no difference between me and Elon Musk - despite me having very little equity.

    You can't expect me to want to vote for a party like that. And I won't be alone.
    Please elaborate on how Labour believe you and Elon Musk are the same.
    Labour will view me as the top 1%, the privileged elite, the wealthy, calibrate their political rhetoric to match - the politics of envy - and tax me as highly as they possibly can.

    I have no doubt it will be politically rewarding for them, but I think it will be bad for the country.

    "They can't possibly be worse than this lot" is a potent campaigning line, but - again - it's an emotive one and of course they can.

    They certainly can.
    And so to avoid taxes on income you will vote for a party that is terrified of taxing the capital you don't possess.
    Labour wants to put VAT on private schools.

    My daughter is at an independent prep school that I went to when I was eight years old. It costs a fair bit but we make sacrifices. We don't go on holiday quite as often as we'd like. We don't eat out as much. But it's a tradeoff we're willing to make. Of course, we're not on the breadline, but we don't lead the lifestyle some of our fellow middle-class professionals do - but it's a choice.

    The school was founded in 1936. It only has 210 pupils. It specialises in outdoor education. I acquired a lifelong love of hiking, camping and archery from it. My passion for design and technology too. Some of the teachers who taught me are still there now. The current headmaster is a real brick and works his socks off. He's a good egg. My daughter loves it there. She's settled, has lots of friends and is very happy. Her and her friends virtually skip into school. They play and learn outside every day.

    At weekends and holidays it throws its doors open to schoolkids in the local area, and runs adventure camps for inner city schoolkids. It also runs Chinese and Russian language courses that attract children from all over the region, to learn, facilities they struggle to find elsewhere.

    Labour's policies would target schools like this. We wouldn't be able to afford the increase in the fees. We'd be faced with wrenching our daughter out of a school she loves and her friends - for us, this is very very personal.

    The survival of the school itself would be in question. And, the benefits it offers to children and the wider community would be lost too. And, for what? So we can plough our extra money into consumption and higher house prices instead, and overburden our local state school instead?

    It might put a smile on the faces of some Labour activists but when it comes to the next election and you can't fathom why everyone doesn't think Labour is the best thing since sliced bread and is desperate to vote for them - think of us.
    I'm afraid that whole post has swayed me not a jot.
    Of course it won't - you're angry at the Tories - not without cause and have convinced yourself, as have so many others, that Starmer is moderate centre-left who won't frighten the horses while trhowing you bits of red meat. And you wish to bathe in the warm red glow of supporting a party that cares, that will probably return the the UKto the EU and do all and only nice things. You need to re-read Animal Farm - next time it's never different.
    "angry with the Tories" doesn't begin to cover it.

    Starmer is, I fear moderate centre-left. I suspect he will be far too moderate to achieve much good.

    I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable.

    Casino told us some time ago what his
    salary is; it's a good salary and no doubt well-deserved. Since the government judges that an adult can live on £335 pm, a couple on £525 pm, and a child on £245 pm I suspect Casino will find a way to fund the
    VAT on his daughter's school fees.

    But do you want him to be able to afford it? It sounds to me that your objection is the unfair advantage his daughter will have in life.

    I'll repeat the salient point from my post: "I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable. "
    Because the charitable benefit is from the use of the facilities during weekends and holidays. If the increase in taxes makes that non-viable then charitable benefit is removed.
    As I pointed out earlier, if Charitable status existed only for schools using more of their budget for charitable purposes than they gain from tax relief then the true charities would continue. Those taking the piss could either give up that status and operate as businesses, or start being more generous.
    A bright line test doesn’t work (eg free use of facilities - how do you account for that). But absolutely the Charity Commission has been very focused for 10+ years on making private schools justify their charitable status by demonstrating what they are doing.
  • Options
    DougSealDougSeal Posts: 11,295
    ydoethur said:

    DougSeal said:

    ydoethur said:

    DougSeal said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Is private healthcare subject to VAT? If yes, then private schools should be too. Both are provided to all by the state, so taking the private option is a choice.
    Fundamentally I believe we pay too little tax for the services we want. The harder question is how you levy those taxes in a fair way. Personally I’d prefer flat taxation. The more you earn, the more you pay, but no stupid cliff edges and marginal rates. Seems simple to me, so there must be something wrong with it.

    Private healthcare is currently VAT exempt I believe but, like private education, should be VATable imo.
    VAT is payable on cosmetic surgery, and a few other niche areas.

    VAT is always a bit daft, hence cakes vs biscuits, whether a pasty is still warm etc.

    A reasonable approach is to require a school to spend more of its income on charitable acts than it saves in VAT in order to maintain charitable status.
    Education is a charitable purpose according to the Charity commission
    Yes, but parents cannot deduct school fees against income tax. It is not a charitable transaction, it is fee for service.
    I know, but you said "a school should be required to spend more of its income on Charitable acts than it saves in VAT".

    I was just pointing out they already do as the act of education is a Charitable purpose. So almost all their expenditure is Charitable. So your idea wouldn't work.
    Fixing that would just require an amendment to the Charities Act 2011 to exclude educational services provided for a fee.
    You mean, like university courses?
    Parliamentary drafting is an art that is ill reflected in a short post on the world’s most pedantic message board that sought to make a general point that laws can be changed.
    Parliamentary drafting is an art that is lost, if it ever existed.
    I’m not sure you spend as much time reading the output as I do, but okay.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,572
    Bear with me as I disappear down the Covid Conspiracy Rabbithole


    "Xi has gone from welding his citizens inside buildings to pushing free travel of Chinese citizens infected with the virus (or a new variant thereof).Xi could easily limit travel, so what is actually going on?Travel bans on Chinese flights are a must.#China"

    https://twitter.com/Jkylebass/status/1608165210157907968?s=20&t=-6el5S1PDPZfu_LgnlTO1A

    it is an astonishing volte face by the CCP. From Zero Covid to Fuck It: in a few weeks

    Is it possible they have identified a new variant which is not only highly nasty, but cannot be contained, and they want the rest of the world to suffer from it, as they suffer? I would ignore this wild possibility, if it weren't for the fact this is EXACTLY what China did with Original Covid, in early 2020. They kept the international air routes open as long as humanly possible, in the face of global opposition, precisely so they seeded it around the world, even as they CLOSED internal routes out of Wuhan/Hubei Province
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,577
    edited December 2022
    Jonathan said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    So @ydoethur, how can you possibly decide where to put the tax if you say only boarding schools should be covered? Where does the axe fall, is it how much the fees are a year? I can see why Labour just said stick it on all purely from ease of administration

    As I say, on boarding fees, which are usually charged for separately.

    And that simplicity Labour proposed, as I pointed out above, might cause significant problems of its own by roping in many things it wasn't intended to cover but are actually beneficial.
    Not a bad idea to charge just on the boarding fees.

    Although in my view as I said towards the end even the day kids were becoming far more "elite", I actually felt quite out of place at times and indeed was bullied about it
    Mrs Foxy went to a private school for a couple of years and hated it. Her parents scraped together enough to send her, and she was always the poorest in the class, with the other girls talking of their ponies and ski holidays etc. She was very glad to leave to go to a state sixth form.
    Private education can work for some. Some parents want something different. I don’t think it’s something the state should subsidise. The money is needed elsewhere. It’s a question of priorities in hard times. This is clearly a luxury.
    A child being in the care system costs a lot more than putting them through Eton, with considerably worse outcomes for most. Why not just send problem kids to Mallory Towers for lacrosse and tuckboxes and french lessons with Mamzelle? It would halve the cost and would be a public service the Schools could perform.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,464
    DougSeal said:

    ydoethur said:

    DougSeal said:

    ydoethur said:

    DougSeal said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Is private healthcare subject to VAT? If yes, then private schools should be too. Both are provided to all by the state, so taking the private option is a choice.
    Fundamentally I believe we pay too little tax for the services we want. The harder question is how you levy those taxes in a fair way. Personally I’d prefer flat taxation. The more you earn, the more you pay, but no stupid cliff edges and marginal rates. Seems simple to me, so there must be something wrong with it.

    Private healthcare is currently VAT exempt I believe but, like private education, should be VATable imo.
    VAT is payable on cosmetic surgery, and a few other niche areas.

    VAT is always a bit daft, hence cakes vs biscuits, whether a pasty is still warm etc.

    A reasonable approach is to require a school to spend more of its income on charitable acts than it saves in VAT in order to maintain charitable status.
    Education is a charitable purpose according to the Charity commission
    Yes, but parents cannot deduct school fees against income tax. It is not a charitable transaction, it is fee for service.
    I know, but you said "a school should be required to spend more of its income on Charitable acts than it saves in VAT".

    I was just pointing out they already do as the act of education is a Charitable purpose. So almost all their expenditure is Charitable. So your idea wouldn't work.
    Fixing that would just require an amendment to the Charities Act 2011 to exclude educational services provided for a fee.
    You mean, like university courses?
    Parliamentary drafting is an art that is ill reflected in a short post on the world’s most pedantic message board that sought to make a general point that laws can be changed.
    Parliamentary drafting is an art that is lost, if it ever existed.
    I’m not sure you spend as much time reading the output as I do, but okay.
    I've read enough of their education bills to realise the average Swiss cheese is more solidly built.

    This would be an education bill.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,572
    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    We would be wise to forbid flights from China, and entry to Chinese nationals, for a few months

    The Chinese gave us this virus, from their lab, they then lied about it in multiple ways, exported it around the world (quite deliberately), so let them suck on its nasty fag end, alone

    How many flights from China arrive in the U.K. each day? How many extra people with covid to add to the over a million already here?
    To be in favour of domestic lockdowns but against preventing people travelling between countries where many people have Covid is a combination I will never understand.
    It's the Left, they are fucking mental. And venal. I loathe them
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,231
    I believe that educational services are exempt from VAT because of EU law.

    So until retained EU law is repealed no government could impose VAT on school fees.

    In one of the many delicious ironies arising from Brexit, it is the Tories who are proposing to repeal in toto all EU retained law by the end of 2023 and it is Labour which is opposing this, in large part because of the absolute chaos it would cause in the employment field.

    There are lots of reasons why the government proposal to repeal all EU retained law within the next year is going to be a clusterfuck of Trussian proportions and why, if it has any sense at all, the Sunak government, should quietly withdraw it. See here, for instance: https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1607996697875206144?s=61&t=-_udYAE5a_0y7NIN0EYWwg.

    At some point it is possible that the Tory party may wake up to the implications of what they are doing - and the Labour Party too will need to engage with the issue of retained EU law.
  • Options
    DougSeal said:

    Leon said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    We would be wise to forbid flights from China, and entry to Chinese nationals, for a few months

    The Chinese gave us this virus, from their lab, they then lied about it in multiple ways, exported it around the world (quite deliberately), so let them suck on its nasty fag end, alone

    Last time we didn't do anything, unlike most countries.
    Trump was slated as a racist for doing what Biden has just done: impose specific restraints on Chinese visitors

    "In late January, the Trump administration implemented a travel restriction from China, where the coronavirus originated.

    Some on the left described the move as a racist or xenophobic ploy aimed at punishing a country that Trump has clashed with"

    lol. The Left is a hyena's nest of pathetic hypocrisy

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/498350-biden-trumps-coronavirus-response-has-been-nakedly-xenophobic/
    Remind me who chants "lock her up" at Hillary Clinton for her handling of sensitive documents in tandem with outrage over an FBI seizure of classified documents at the man who leads them, repeats unsubstantiated concerns over election fraud while attempting to overthrow the democratic process, assert that "Blue Lives Matter" except during the Jan. 6 insurrection, claim that invoking the Fifth amendment means a person is definitely guilty, except when they do it? You sure that’s the Left?

    Maybe all that is true but @Leon is making the point that when Trump banned Chinese visitors he was criticised for being racist from the left and now Biden is doing the banning, there is radio silence.

    Do you disagree that is double standards?
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,335
    Leon said:

    Bear with me as I disappear down the Covid Conspiracy Rabbithole


    "Xi has gone from welding his citizens inside buildings to pushing free travel of Chinese citizens infected with the virus (or a new variant thereof).Xi could easily limit travel, so what is actually going on?Travel bans on Chinese flights are a must.#China"

    https://twitter.com/Jkylebass/status/1608165210157907968?s=20&t=-6el5S1PDPZfu_LgnlTO1A

    it is an astonishing volte face by the CCP. From Zero Covid to Fuck It: in a few weeks

    Is it possible they have identified a new variant which is not only highly nasty, but cannot be contained, and they want the rest of the world to suffer from it, as they suffer? I would ignore this wild possibility, if it weren't for the fact this is EXACTLY what China did with Original Covid, in early 2020. They kept the international air routes open as long as humanly possible, in the face of global opposition, precisely so they seeded it around the world, even as they CLOSED internal routes out of Wuhan/Hubei Province

    Yep, rabbit hole. We already have variants in the U.K. that cannot be contained. China is now experiencing what happens if you try and fail to suppress covid, use shit vaccines and fail to vaccinate those who need it most, and fail to update the vaccines.

    At heart most people in the U.K. have now had covid, and thus have antibodies against the whole virus, not just spike protein. This makes it a lot harder for the virus to evade immunity completely. This is not the same as neutralising antibodies - it’s the rest of the immune system. So we get lots of infections (tick) but also most people getting over it (also tick).

    There is no need to invoke a new variant to explain what is happening in China.
  • Options
    EPGEPG Posts: 6,048

    Is all this debate about VAT on school fees a distraction from Labour?

    Much as I have argued it's wrong to exempt fees from VAT, I can't see it being a huge vote winner for Labour. Few voters will say 'that settles it then, I am voting Labour' on the basis of taxing school fees.

    A question of huge importance hanging over the next two years is 'What is going to be in the Labour manifesto?'

    I fear a damp squib but maybe they are keeping their powder dry. I do hope Labour come up with a bit more than VAT on school fees.

    Calm down. Outside the PB earner demographic nobody moans that they are already relieving themselves on the state sector by segregating their kids from the oiks.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,843

    tlg86 said:

    Dixie Dean's record is going this season if Haaland remains fit isn't it?

    Flat track bully.
    I disagree (I suspect your are joking😘!). Harland is the real deal. We have not a striker like this, as good as this for a very long time, if at all.
    He is also still young and developing. Much better value than Grealish.
  • Options

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    We would be wise to forbid flights from China, and entry to Chinese nationals, for a few months

    The Chinese gave us this virus, from their lab, they then lied about it in multiple ways, exported it around the world (quite deliberately), so let them suck on its nasty fag end, alone

    How many flights from China arrive in the U.K. each day? How many extra people with covid to add to the over a million already here?
    For a scientist you are alarmingly low-watt

    China is basically a 1.4bn strong human petri dish, in the global lab, right now - a petri dish given the task of finding out if Covid can conjure up another dangerous vaccine evasive variant - when allowed to assault 1.4bn unprotected people in a matter of a few weeks

    Hopefully China will prove that our fears are overblown, but why err on the side of generosity to Chinese tourists and visitors, given what China has done to itself and to the world, these last three years?

    I swear there are people in the UK who would rather we all die, than that they might be perceived as just 5% "racist"
    Covid is doing the experiments right round the world anyway. You are falling into the suppression trap again. The most dangerous people are not Chinese peasants, they are the immune compromised western patients who undergo lengthy covid infections, and those being treated with mabs, now being shown to provoke mutations (hardly suprising really - treatment puts evolutionary pressure on virus, result obvious).
    There really is little point stopping Chinese travellers today. There would have been in early 2020.
    It is pointless arguing with Leon with facts and logic. You might as well play chess with a pigeon.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,231

    I wouldn't like to reveal my age but with the greatest of respect to all PB posters, I was probably at a private school the most recently. Still a long time ago mind.

    I went to school in Hampshire/Surrey so I am sure my views will be based on those experiences. When I started off, it was similar to the view HYUFD gives across, that's certainly the background my parents came from.

    But as time went on and the fees became higher it became more Russians/Asians/Saudis. I have some friends who have much younger siblings still at these schools and they are now completely different people going. My parents wouldn't be able to afford it now but also I am not sure I'd want to go, it's mixing with Princes and Royalty and gives a very distorted view of the world in my experience of these kids.

    So perhaps it is different elsewhere in the country but I cannot see how putting VAT on these parents can be anything but positive overall.

    I am the Chair of Trustees of a small independent Catholic girls' primary school, my old primary school. My experience of education is therefore much more recent than yours. And I can categorically state that none of our parents fall remotely within the category of royalty, Saudis or people even remotely like them, that you describe.

    Not every private school is like Eton, Winchester etc and the discussion on this topic would be better if people realised this.

  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,209

    tlg86 said:

    Dixie Dean's record is going this season if Haaland remains fit isn't it?

    Flat track bully.
    I disagree (I suspect your are joking😘!). Harland is the real deal. We have not a striker like this, as good as this for a very long time, if at all.
    He reminds me of Van Nistelrooy. Looking forward (if that's the right phrase) to seeing him in the flesh at the Emirates in February.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,843
    Cyclefree said:

    I believe that educational services are exempt from VAT because of EU law.

    So until retained EU law is repealed no government could impose VAT on school fees.

    In one of the many delicious ironies arising from Brexit, it is the Tories who are proposing to repeal in toto all EU retained law by the end of 2023 and it is Labour which is opposing this, in large part because of the absolute chaos it would cause in the employment field.

    There are lots of reasons why the government proposal to repeal all EU retained law within the next year is going to be a clusterfuck of Trussian proportions and why, if it has any sense at all, the Sunak government, should quietly withdraw it. See here, for instance: https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1607996697875206144?s=61&t=-_udYAE5a_0y7NIN0EYWwg.

    At some point it is possible that the Tory party may wake up to the implications of what they are doing - and the Labour Party too will need to engage with the issue of retained EU law.

    It looks to be a completely unessecary self inflicted wound which will snarl up all remaining Parliamentary time until the GE, while simultaneously hampering British companies trying to act legally.

    Who said Sunak was smart?
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,572

    Leon said:

    Bear with me as I disappear down the Covid Conspiracy Rabbithole


    "Xi has gone from welding his citizens inside buildings to pushing free travel of Chinese citizens infected with the virus (or a new variant thereof).Xi could easily limit travel, so what is actually going on?Travel bans on Chinese flights are a must.#China"

    https://twitter.com/Jkylebass/status/1608165210157907968?s=20&t=-6el5S1PDPZfu_LgnlTO1A

    it is an astonishing volte face by the CCP. From Zero Covid to Fuck It: in a few weeks

    Is it possible they have identified a new variant which is not only highly nasty, but cannot be contained, and they want the rest of the world to suffer from it, as they suffer? I would ignore this wild possibility, if it weren't for the fact this is EXACTLY what China did with Original Covid, in early 2020. They kept the international air routes open as long as humanly possible, in the face of global opposition, precisely so they seeded it around the world, even as they CLOSED internal routes out of Wuhan/Hubei Province

    Yep, rabbit hole. We already have variants in the U.K. that cannot be contained. China is now experiencing what happens if you try and fail to suppress covid, use shit vaccines and fail to vaccinate those who need it most, and fail to update the vaccines.

    At heart most people in the U.K. have now had covid, and thus have antibodies against the whole virus, not just spike protein. This makes it a lot harder for the virus to evade immunity completely. This is not the same as neutralising antibodies - it’s the rest of the immune system. So we get lots of infections (tick) but also most people getting over it (also tick).

    There is no need to invoke a new variant to explain what is happening in China.
    Forgive me for suggesting that Xi and the Chinese Communist Party might not always act in the interests of all humanity, rather than in the narrow interests of Xi, his cronies and the Chinese regime

    I don't know what came over me
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,335
    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    Dixie Dean's record is going this season if Haaland remains fit isn't it?

    Flat track bully.
    I disagree (I suspect your are joking😘!). Harland is the real deal. We have not a striker like this, as good as this for a very long time, if at all.
    He reminds me of Van Nistelrooy. Looking forward (if that's the right phrase) to seeing him in the flesh at the Emirates in February.
    I see the similarity, but I think he’s better.
  • Options
    EPGEPG Posts: 6,048

    tlg86 said:

    FPT:

    felix said:

    Tres said:

    Jonathan said:

    As a few of us have been saying.

    "Starmer has — and this is possible to glimpse despite his opacity — always been quite left-wing. He was to the left of every leader since he was in his twenties. Except Corbyn, because there is nobody to the left of Corbyn. But he was, at least, quite comfortable with Corbyn as leader. The alternative theory posits that this wasn’t play-acting. He didn’t just say that the 2017 manifesto was a foundational document for Labour, he actually meant it. He didn’t just run as a leader from the left — mainstream, not Corbynite, but still the left — that is actually his politics.

    But on becoming leader he understood he couldn’t win an election like that. He’d have to lowball voters. It took him a while to appreciate that, but once he did he was pretty robust about it. He has been focused and committed in his work of reassurance.

    If he were to capture power he would then be able to move the country leftward, with voter assent. He would return to something closer to his natural instinct. And it would not be the left who would feel betrayed."


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/keir-starmer-may-be-more-left-wing-than-he-lets-on-82fwdr2t7

    Yawn. New Labour, New Danger. Seen this every time a Labour leader looks like winning.
    The thing about pooh-poohing the boy who cried wolf is that the wolf did eventually come.

    10 years ago, I was living on about £100 a month after housing, commuting, bills and food and only paying basic rate. I've worked very hard to get where I am now. But, because I now have a six-figure income (and that's only in the last 18 months) Labour sees no difference between me and Elon Musk - despite me having very little equity.

    You can't expect me to want to vote for a party like that. And I won't be alone.
    Please elaborate on how Labour believe you and Elon Musk are the same.
    Labour will view me as the top 1%, the privileged elite, the wealthy, calibrate their political rhetoric to match - the politics of envy - and tax me as highly as they possibly can.

    I have no doubt it will be politically rewarding for them, but I think it will be bad for the country.

    "They can't possibly be worse than this lot" is a potent campaigning line, but - again - it's an emotive one and of course they can.

    They certainly can.
    And so to avoid taxes on income you will vote for a party that is terrified of taxing the capital you don't possess.
    Labour wants to put VAT on private schools.

    My daughter is at an independent prep school that I went to when I was eight years old. It costs a fair bit but we make sacrifices. We don't go on holiday quite as often as we'd like. We don't eat out as much. But it's a tradeoff we're willing to make. Of course, we're not on the breadline, but we don't lead the lifestyle some of our fellow middle-class professionals do - but it's a choice.

    The school was founded in 1936. It only has 210 pupils. It specialises in outdoor education. I acquired a lifelong love of hiking, camping and archery from it. My passion for design and technology too. Some of the teachers who taught me are still there now. The current headmaster is a real brick and works his socks off. He's a good egg. My daughter loves it there. She's settled, has lots of friends and is very happy. Her and her friends virtually skip into school. They play and learn outside every day.

    At weekends and holidays it throws its doors open to schoolkids in the local area, and runs adventure camps for inner city schoolkids. It also runs Chinese and Russian language courses that attract children from all over the region, to learn, facilities they struggle to find elsewhere.

    Labour's policies would target schools like this. We wouldn't be able to afford the increase in the fees. We'd be faced with wrenching our daughter out of a school she loves and her friends - for us, this is very very personal.

    The survival of the school itself would be in question. And, the benefits it offers to children and the wider community would be lost too. And, for what? So we can plough our extra money into consumption and higher house prices instead, and overburden our local state school instead?

    It might put a smile on the faces of some Labour activists but when it comes to the next election and you can't fathom why everyone doesn't think Labour is the best thing since sliced bread and is desperate to vote for them - think of us.
    I'm afraid that whole post has swayed me not a jot.
    Of course it won't - you're angry at the Tories - not without cause and have convinced yourself, as have so many others, that Starmer is moderate centre-left who won't frighten the horses while trhowing you bits of red meat. And you wish to bathe in the warm red glow of supporting a party that cares, that will probably return the the UKto the EU and do all and only nice things. You need to re-read Animal Farm - next time it's never different.
    "angry with the Tories" doesn't begin to cover it.

    Starmer is, I fear moderate centre-left. I suspect he will be far too moderate to achieve much good.

    I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable.

    Casino told us some time ago what his
    salary is; it's a good salary and no doubt well-deserved. Since the government judges that an adult can live on £335 pm, a couple on £525 pm, and a child on £245 pm I suspect Casino will find a way to fund the
    VAT on his daughter's school fees.

    But do you want him to be able to afford it? It sounds to me that your objection is the unfair advantage his daughter will have in life.

    I'll repeat the salient point from my post: "I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable. "
    Because the charitable benefit is from the use of the facilities during weekends and holidays. If the increase in taxes makes that non-viable then charitable benefit is removed.
    Eton had a new sports hall built whilst the school around the corner was asking for donations to buy teaching supplies. How is that fair
    Because it was privately funded by donations from taxed income (I assume).

    The charitable aspect - and Eton is great about this - is from sharing the facilities with local schools and residents for no cost. So those kids get access to facilities that they wouldn’t otherwise have in the state sector.


    The parents can just send their kids to state schools and fund a charitable sports hall out of altruism.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,864
    edited December 2022
    Cyclefree said:

    I believe that educational services are exempt from VAT because of EU law.

    So until retained EU law is repealed no government could impose VAT on school fees.

    In one of the many delicious ironies arising from Brexit, it is the Tories who are proposing to repeal in toto all EU retained law by the end of 2023 and it is Labour which is opposing this, in large part because of the absolute chaos it would cause in the employment field.

    There are lots of reasons why the government proposal to repeal all EU retained law within the next year is going to be a clusterfuck of Trussian proportions and why, if it has any sense at all, the Sunak government, should quietly withdraw it. See here, for instance: https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1607996697875206144?s=61&t=-_udYAE5a_0y7NIN0EYWwg.

    At some point it is possible that the Tory party may wake up to the implications of what they are doing - and the Labour Party too will need to engage with the issue of retained EU law.

    I think the member states had some flexibility here. EU Article 132 exempts from VAT, among other things:

    "the provision of children's or young people's education, school or university education, vocational training or retraining, including the supply of services and of goods closely related thereto, by bodies governed by public law having such as their aim or by other organisations recognised by the Member State concerned as having similar objects;"

    (My bold)

    But if not, how ironic if the first real benefit of Brexit is the removal of this iniquitous VAT exemption.
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,335
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Bear with me as I disappear down the Covid Conspiracy Rabbithole


    "Xi has gone from welding his citizens inside buildings to pushing free travel of Chinese citizens infected with the virus (or a new variant thereof).Xi could easily limit travel, so what is actually going on?Travel bans on Chinese flights are a must.#China"

    https://twitter.com/Jkylebass/status/1608165210157907968?s=20&t=-6el5S1PDPZfu_LgnlTO1A

    it is an astonishing volte face by the CCP. From Zero Covid to Fuck It: in a few weeks

    Is it possible they have identified a new variant which is not only highly nasty, but cannot be contained, and they want the rest of the world to suffer from it, as they suffer? I would ignore this wild possibility, if it weren't for the fact this is EXACTLY what China did with Original Covid, in early 2020. They kept the international air routes open as long as humanly possible, in the face of global opposition, precisely so they seeded it around the world, even as they CLOSED internal routes out of Wuhan/Hubei Province

    Yep, rabbit hole. We already have variants in the U.K. that cannot be contained. China is now experiencing what happens if you try and fail to suppress covid, use shit vaccines and fail to vaccinate those who need it most, and fail to update the vaccines.

    At heart most people in the U.K. have now had covid, and thus have antibodies against the whole virus, not just spike protein. This makes it a lot harder for the virus to evade immunity completely. This is not the same as neutralising antibodies - it’s the rest of the immune system. So we get lots of infections (tick) but also most people getting over it (also tick).

    There is no need to invoke a new variant to explain what is happening in China.
    Forgive me for suggesting that Xi and the Chinese Communist Party might not always act in the interests of all humanity, rather than in the narrow interests of Xi, his cronies and the Chinese regime

    I don't know what came over me
    I think your analysis of what they did in 2020 is absolutely on the money. It’s possible you are on to something now, but I think the narrative of the Chinese watching the World Cup, realising the rest of the world is no longer doing what China is re covid and finally cracking is most likely.
  • Options
    MaxPB said:

    tlg86 said:

    FPT:

    felix said:

    Tres said:

    Jonathan said:

    As a few of us have been saying.

    "Starmer has — and this is possible to glimpse despite his opacity — always been quite left-wing. He was to the left of every leader since he was in his twenties. Except Corbyn, because there is nobody to the left of Corbyn. But he was, at least, quite comfortable with Corbyn as leader. The alternative theory posits that this wasn’t play-acting. He didn’t just say that the 2017 manifesto was a foundational document for Labour, he actually meant it. He didn’t just run as a leader from the left — mainstream, not Corbynite, but still the left — that is actually his politics.

    But on becoming leader he understood he couldn’t win an election like that. He’d have to lowball voters. It took him a while to appreciate that, but once he did he was pretty robust about it. He has been focused and committed in his work of reassurance.

    If he were to capture power he would then be able to move the country leftward, with voter assent. He would return to something closer to his natural instinct. And it would not be the left who would feel betrayed."


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/keir-starmer-may-be-more-left-wing-than-he-lets-on-82fwdr2t7

    Yawn. New Labour, New Danger. Seen this every time a Labour leader looks like winning.
    The thing about pooh-poohing the boy who cried wolf is that the wolf did eventually come.

    10 years ago, I was living on about £100 a month after housing, commuting, bills and food and only paying basic rate. I've worked very hard to get where I am now. But, because I now have a six-figure income (and that's only in the last 18 months) Labour sees no difference between me and Elon Musk - despite me having very little equity.

    You can't expect me to want to vote for a party like that. And I won't be alone.
    Please elaborate on how Labour believe you and Elon Musk are the same.
    Labour will view me as the top 1%, the privileged elite, the wealthy, calibrate their political rhetoric to match - the politics of envy - and tax me as highly as they possibly can.

    I have no doubt it will be politically rewarding for them, but I think it will be bad for the country.

    "They can't possibly be worse than this lot" is a potent campaigning line, but - again - it's an emotive one and of course they can.

    They certainly can.
    And so to avoid taxes on income you will vote for a party that is terrified of taxing the capital you don't possess.
    Labour wants to put VAT on private schools.

    My daughter is at an independent prep school that I went to when I was eight years old. It costs a fair bit but we make sacrifices. We don't go on holiday quite as often as we'd like. We don't eat out as much. But it's a tradeoff we're willing to make. Of course, we're not on the breadline, but we don't lead the lifestyle some of our fellow middle-class professionals do - but it's a choice.

    The school was founded in 1936. It only has 210 pupils. It specialises in outdoor education. I acquired a lifelong love of hiking, camping and archery from it. My passion for design and technology too. Some of the teachers who taught me are still there now. The current headmaster is a real brick and works his socks off. He's a good egg. My daughter loves it there. She's settled, has lots of friends and is very happy. Her and her friends virtually skip into school. They play and learn outside every day.

    At weekends and holidays it throws its doors open to schoolkids in the local area, and runs adventure camps for inner city schoolkids. It also runs Chinese and Russian language courses that attract children from all over the region, to learn, facilities they struggle to find elsewhere.

    Labour's policies would target schools like this. We wouldn't be able to afford the increase in the fees. We'd be faced with wrenching our daughter out of a school she loves and her friends - for us, this is very very personal.

    The survival of the school itself would be in question. And, the benefits it offers to children and the wider community would be lost too. And, for what? So we can plough our extra money into consumption and higher house prices instead, and overburden our local state school instead?

    It might put a smile on the faces of some Labour activists but when it comes to the next election and you can't fathom why everyone doesn't think Labour is the best thing since sliced bread and is desperate to vote for them - think of us.
    I'm afraid that whole post has swayed me not a jot.
    Of course it won't - you're angry at the Tories - not without cause and have convinced yourself, as have so many others, that Starmer is moderate centre-left who won't frighten the horses while trhowing you bits of red meat. And you wish to bathe in the warm red glow of supporting a party that cares, that will probably return the the UKto the EU and do all and only nice things. You need to re-read Animal Farm - next time it's never different.
    "angry with the Tories" doesn't begin to cover it.

    Starmer is, I fear moderate centre-left. I suspect he will be far too moderate to achieve much good.

    I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable.

    Casino told us some time ago what his
    salary is; it's a good salary and no doubt well-deserved. Since the government judges that an adult can live on £335 pm, a couple on £525 pm, and a child on £245 pm I suspect Casino will find a way to fund the
    VAT on his daughter's school fees.

    But do you want him to be able to afford it? It sounds to me that your objection is the unfair advantage his daughter will have in life.

    I'll repeat the salient point from my post: "I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable. "
    There is another thing worth remembering. State school funding has been put through the mangle over the last decade, roughly a ten percent cut per pupil from 2010 to 2020. And the state sector has been told to get on with it, work more efficiently yada yada.
    In that context (plus the knowledge that private businesses set charges at "as much as we can get away with" more than "cost plus reasonable margin"), I'm not sure that private schools should be a priority for tax allowances. Not because of hate or envy, just because there are other kids who would benefit more.
    School funding was sacrificed at the altar of old age spending on the NHS and pensions. If anything getting more kids into private sector schooling will at least allow the for higher spend per student.

    Everyone wants to ignore the elephant in the room when it comes to spending decisions but we're getting to the point now where both parties will have to say there's no unlimited pot for pensions and healthcare for our parents generation and either they self fund it through higher taxes on their wealth/pension income or the government finally, finally cuts service provision and pensions.
    The reason for tax concessions on pensions and savings is that governments are incentivising self-funding. Successive governments of both parties want people to save, and have kept state pensions low (pace the triple lock) and abolished SERPS.
  • Options
    It's interesting how we don't want to help the minority that go to university with their fees yet we're bending over backwards to help the minority that go to private schools!
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,572

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Bear with me as I disappear down the Covid Conspiracy Rabbithole


    "Xi has gone from welding his citizens inside buildings to pushing free travel of Chinese citizens infected with the virus (or a new variant thereof).Xi could easily limit travel, so what is actually going on?Travel bans on Chinese flights are a must.#China"

    https://twitter.com/Jkylebass/status/1608165210157907968?s=20&t=-6el5S1PDPZfu_LgnlTO1A

    it is an astonishing volte face by the CCP. From Zero Covid to Fuck It: in a few weeks

    Is it possible they have identified a new variant which is not only highly nasty, but cannot be contained, and they want the rest of the world to suffer from it, as they suffer? I would ignore this wild possibility, if it weren't for the fact this is EXACTLY what China did with Original Covid, in early 2020. They kept the international air routes open as long as humanly possible, in the face of global opposition, precisely so they seeded it around the world, even as they CLOSED internal routes out of Wuhan/Hubei Province

    Yep, rabbit hole. We already have variants in the U.K. that cannot be contained. China is now experiencing what happens if you try and fail to suppress covid, use shit vaccines and fail to vaccinate those who need it most, and fail to update the vaccines.

    At heart most people in the U.K. have now had covid, and thus have antibodies against the whole virus, not just spike protein. This makes it a lot harder for the virus to evade immunity completely. This is not the same as neutralising antibodies - it’s the rest of the immune system. So we get lots of infections (tick) but also most people getting over it (also tick).

    There is no need to invoke a new variant to explain what is happening in China.
    Forgive me for suggesting that Xi and the Chinese Communist Party might not always act in the interests of all humanity, rather than in the narrow interests of Xi, his cronies and the Chinese regime

    I don't know what came over me
    I think your analysis of what they did in 2020 is absolutely on the money. It’s possible you are on to something now, but I think the narrative of the Chinese watching the World Cup, realising the rest of the world is no longer doing what China is re covid and finally cracking is most likely.
    Yes, I agree, which is why I used the word "rabbit-hole". I am not sure of this, just rightly cautious and suspicious

    This is a time for the Precautionary Principle. China "suddenly" wants to open up, as does Hong Kong, after three years of telling us all to fuck off and stay away, following a virus THEY leaked (out of China, for sure, out of a lab, probably)? Hmmmmmm

    We should politely tell them to do one, for three months. No flights from China, no Chinese nationals, until the spring, and until we know more about their exit wave. Let us take care of our own - as they did

  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,409
    edited December 2022
    Cyclefree said:

    I wouldn't like to reveal my age but with the greatest of respect to all PB posters, I was probably at a private school the most recently. Still a long time ago mind.

    I went to school in Hampshire/Surrey so I am sure my views will be based on those experiences. When I started off, it was similar to the view HYUFD gives across, that's certainly the background my parents came from.

    But as time went on and the fees became higher it became more Russians/Asians/Saudis. I have some friends who have much younger siblings still at these schools and they are now completely different people going. My parents wouldn't be able to afford it now but also I am not sure I'd want to go, it's mixing with Princes and Royalty and gives a very distorted view of the world in my experience of these kids.

    So perhaps it is different elsewhere in the country but I cannot see how putting VAT on these parents can be anything but positive overall.

    I am the Chair of Trustees of a small independent Catholic girls' primary school, my old primary school. My experience of education is therefore much more recent than yours. And I can categorically state that none of our parents fall remotely within the category of royalty, Saudis or people even remotely like them, that you describe.

    Not every private school is like Eton, Winchester etc and the discussion on this topic would be better if people realised this.

    My son is head of IT at the local public school and he would endorse your comments 100%

    There is a lot of misunderstanding on this subject and it is certain the wealthy types that go to Eton etc will not blink an eye but many of those who do make sacrifices for their children to attend will have little option but to send them to the state schools

    Furthermore the bursaries will go and of course the access to the amenities which are enjoyed by the community

    As others have suggested I doubt it is worth it when it comes to it and I would expect a judicial review from the schools identified by @Cyclefree

    I would just comment that in my sons case his school was founded by the Methodist and they do a lot of charity and community work and actively support my son as a crew member of the RNLI
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,335

    It's interesting how we don't want to help the minority that go to university with their fees yet we're bending over backwards to help the minority that go to private schools!

    We do help though. We provide a loans system that many won’t actually pay back. We provide government funding to universities. There are bursaries available for some.
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,335
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Bear with me as I disappear down the Covid Conspiracy Rabbithole


    "Xi has gone from welding his citizens inside buildings to pushing free travel of Chinese citizens infected with the virus (or a new variant thereof).Xi could easily limit travel, so what is actually going on?Travel bans on Chinese flights are a must.#China"

    https://twitter.com/Jkylebass/status/1608165210157907968?s=20&t=-6el5S1PDPZfu_LgnlTO1A

    it is an astonishing volte face by the CCP. From Zero Covid to Fuck It: in a few weeks

    Is it possible they have identified a new variant which is not only highly nasty, but cannot be contained, and they want the rest of the world to suffer from it, as they suffer? I would ignore this wild possibility, if it weren't for the fact this is EXACTLY what China did with Original Covid, in early 2020. They kept the international air routes open as long as humanly possible, in the face of global opposition, precisely so they seeded it around the world, even as they CLOSED internal routes out of Wuhan/Hubei Province

    Yep, rabbit hole. We already have variants in the U.K. that cannot be contained. China is now experiencing what happens if you try and fail to suppress covid, use shit vaccines and fail to vaccinate those who need it most, and fail to update the vaccines.

    At heart most people in the U.K. have now had covid, and thus have antibodies against the whole virus, not just spike protein. This makes it a lot harder for the virus to evade immunity completely. This is not the same as neutralising antibodies - it’s the rest of the immune system. So we get lots of infections (tick) but also most people getting over it (also tick).

    There is no need to invoke a new variant to explain what is happening in China.
    Forgive me for suggesting that Xi and the Chinese Communist Party might not always act in the interests of all humanity, rather than in the narrow interests of Xi, his cronies and the Chinese regime

    I don't know what came over me
    I think your analysis of what they did in 2020 is absolutely on the money. It’s possible you are on to something now, but I think the narrative of the Chinese watching the World Cup, realising the rest of the world is no longer doing what China is re covid and finally cracking is most likely.
    Yes, I agree, which is why I used the word "rabbit-hole". I am not sure of this, just rightly cautious and suspicious

    This is a time for the Precautionary Principle. China "suddenly" wants to open up, as does Hong Kong, after three years of telling us all to fuck off and stay away, following a virus THEY leaked (out of China, for sure, out of a lab, probably)? Hmmmmmm

    We should politely tell them to do one, for three months. No flights from China, no Chinese nationals, until the spring, and until we know more about their exit wave. Let us take care of our own - as they did

    That would require the world to do that, not just us.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,348
    ...

    Andy_JS said:

    Why don't we all get a tax rebate on our uni fees?

    What about the majority who don't go to university?
    What about the majority that don't go to private schools?
    Another irony is once we attain our A levels from private and state school alike we are all thrown in the same mix. State sector scumbag filth debutanting ladies from Marlborough College (or Malvern, Cheltenham and Rodene). It shouldn't be allowed.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,864

    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    FPT:

    felix said:

    Tres said:

    Jonathan said:

    As a few of us have been saying.

    "Starmer has — and this is possible to glimpse despite his opacity — always been quite left-wing. He was to the left of every leader since he was in his twenties. Except Corbyn, because there is nobody to the left of Corbyn. But he was, at least, quite comfortable with Corbyn as leader. The alternative theory posits that this wasn’t play-acting. He didn’t just say that the 2017 manifesto was a foundational document for Labour, he actually meant it. He didn’t just run as a leader from the left — mainstream, not Corbynite, but still the left — that is actually his politics.

    But on becoming leader he understood he couldn’t win an election like that. He’d have to lowball voters. It took him a while to appreciate that, but once he did he was pretty robust about it. He has been focused and committed in his work of reassurance.

    If he were to capture power he would then be able to move the country leftward, with voter assent. He would return to something closer to his natural instinct. And it would not be the left who would feel betrayed."


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/keir-starmer-may-be-more-left-wing-than-he-lets-on-82fwdr2t7

    Yawn. New Labour, New Danger. Seen this every time a Labour leader looks like winning.
    The thing about pooh-poohing the boy who cried wolf is that the wolf did eventually come.

    10 years ago, I was living on about £100 a month after housing, commuting, bills and food and only paying basic rate. I've worked very hard to get where I am now. But, because I now have a six-figure income (and that's only in the last 18 months) Labour sees no difference between me and Elon Musk - despite me having very little equity.

    You can't expect me to want to vote for a party like that. And I won't be alone.
    Please elaborate on how Labour believe you and Elon Musk are the same.
    Labour will view me as the top 1%, the privileged elite, the wealthy, calibrate their political rhetoric to match - the politics of envy - and tax me as highly as they possibly can.

    I have no doubt it will be politically rewarding for them, but I think it will be bad for the country.

    "They can't possibly be worse than this lot" is a potent campaigning line, but - again - it's an emotive one and of course they can.

    They certainly can.
    And so to avoid taxes on income you will vote for a party that is terrified of taxing the capital you don't possess.
    Labour wants to put VAT on private schools.

    My daughter is at an independent prep school that I went to when I was eight years old. It costs a fair bit but we make sacrifices. We don't go on holiday quite as often as we'd like. We don't eat out as much. But it's a tradeoff we're willing to make. Of course, we're not on the breadline, but we don't lead the lifestyle some of our fellow middle-class professionals do - but it's a choice.

    The school was founded in 1936. It only has 210 pupils. It specialises in outdoor education. I acquired a lifelong love of hiking, camping and archery from it. My passion for design and technology too. Some of the teachers who taught me are still there now. The current headmaster is a real brick and works his socks off. He's a good egg. My daughter loves it there. She's settled, has lots of friends and is very happy. Her and her friends virtually skip into school. They play and learn outside every day.

    At weekends and holidays it throws its doors open to schoolkids in the local area, and runs adventure camps for inner city schoolkids. It also runs Chinese and Russian language courses that attract children from all over the region, to learn, facilities they struggle to find elsewhere.

    Labour's policies would target schools like this. We wouldn't be able to afford the increase in the fees. We'd be faced with wrenching our daughter out of a school she loves and her friends - for us, this is very very personal.

    The survival of the school itself would be in question. And, the benefits it offers to children and the wider community would be lost too. And, for what? So we can plough our extra money into consumption and higher house prices instead, and overburden our local state school instead?

    It might put a smile on the faces of some Labour activists but when it comes to the next election and you can't fathom why everyone doesn't think Labour is the best thing since sliced bread and is desperate to vote for them - think of us.
    I'm afraid that whole post has swayed me not a jot.
    Of course it won't - you're angry at the Tories - not without cause and have convinced yourself, as have so many others, that Starmer is moderate centre-left who won't frighten the horses while trhowing you bits of red meat. And you wish to bathe in the warm red glow of supporting a party that cares, that will probably return the the UKto the EU and do all and only nice things. You need to re-read Animal Farm - next time it's never different.
    "angry with the Tories" doesn't begin to cover it.

    Starmer is, I fear moderate centre-left. I suspect he will be far too moderate to achieve much good.

    I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable.

    Casino told us some time ago what his
    salary is; it's a good salary and no doubt well-deserved. Since the government judges that an adult can live on £335 pm, a couple on £525 pm, and a child on £245 pm I suspect Casino will find a way to fund the
    VAT on his daughter's school fees.

    But do you want him to be able to afford it? It sounds to me that your objection is the unfair advantage his daughter will have in life.

    I'll repeat the salient point from my post: "I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable. "
    Because the charitable benefit is from the use of the facilities during weekends and holidays. If the increase in taxes makes that non-viable then charitable benefit is removed.
    As I pointed out earlier, if Charitable status existed only for schools using more of their budget for charitable purposes than they gain from tax relief then the true charities would continue. Those taking the piss could either give up that status and operate as businesses, or start being more generous.
    A bright line test doesn’t work (eg free use of facilities - how do you account for that). But absolutely the Charity Commission has been very focused for 10+ years on making private schools justify their charitable status by demonstrating what they are doing.
    And yet, a nearby private school can happily list this as its Charity Overview on the Charity Commission website:

    "Activities - how the charity spends its money

    The School which is a boarding and day preparatory school, for both boys and girls, exists to provide children between the ages of three and thirteen with an all-round education of the very highest quality. The school continues to prepare children for Common Entrance and Senior Independent School Scholarships and to ensure that each child has a full extra-curricular programme."


    Not much mention of the wider community there.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,572

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Bear with me as I disappear down the Covid Conspiracy Rabbithole


    "Xi has gone from welding his citizens inside buildings to pushing free travel of Chinese citizens infected with the virus (or a new variant thereof).Xi could easily limit travel, so what is actually going on?Travel bans on Chinese flights are a must.#China"

    https://twitter.com/Jkylebass/status/1608165210157907968?s=20&t=-6el5S1PDPZfu_LgnlTO1A

    it is an astonishing volte face by the CCP. From Zero Covid to Fuck It: in a few weeks

    Is it possible they have identified a new variant which is not only highly nasty, but cannot be contained, and they want the rest of the world to suffer from it, as they suffer? I would ignore this wild possibility, if it weren't for the fact this is EXACTLY what China did with Original Covid, in early 2020. They kept the international air routes open as long as humanly possible, in the face of global opposition, precisely so they seeded it around the world, even as they CLOSED internal routes out of Wuhan/Hubei Province

    Yep, rabbit hole. We already have variants in the U.K. that cannot be contained. China is now experiencing what happens if you try and fail to suppress covid, use shit vaccines and fail to vaccinate those who need it most, and fail to update the vaccines.

    At heart most people in the U.K. have now had covid, and thus have antibodies against the whole virus, not just spike protein. This makes it a lot harder for the virus to evade immunity completely. This is not the same as neutralising antibodies - it’s the rest of the immune system. So we get lots of infections (tick) but also most people getting over it (also tick).

    There is no need to invoke a new variant to explain what is happening in China.
    Forgive me for suggesting that Xi and the Chinese Communist Party might not always act in the interests of all humanity, rather than in the narrow interests of Xi, his cronies and the Chinese regime

    I don't know what came over me
    I think your analysis of what they did in 2020 is absolutely on the money. It’s possible you are on to something now, but I think the narrative of the Chinese watching the World Cup, realising the rest of the world is no longer doing what China is re covid and finally cracking is most likely.
    Yes, I agree, which is why I used the word "rabbit-hole". I am not sure of this, just rightly cautious and suspicious

    This is a time for the Precautionary Principle. China "suddenly" wants to open up, as does Hong Kong, after three years of telling us all to fuck off and stay away, following a virus THEY leaked (out of China, for sure, out of a lab, probably)? Hmmmmmm

    We should politely tell them to do one, for three months. No flights from China, no Chinese nationals, until the spring, and until we know more about their exit wave. Let us take care of our own - as they did

    That would require the world to do that, not just us.
    We could at least start. America and Italy have now suddenly imposed tests etc

    Just stop flights and introduce travel bans from China. It's not hard. They are going through an unprecedented exit wave. The risk to us is palpable

    NOT doing this because we are scared of being accused of "racism" is puerile
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,370

    Is all this debate about VAT on school fees a distraction from Labour?

    Much as I have argued it's wrong to exempt fees from VAT, I can't see it being a huge vote winner for Labour. Few voters will say 'that settles it then, I am voting Labour' on the basis of taxing school fees.

    A question of huge importance hanging over the next two years is 'What is going to be in the Labour manifesto?'

    I fear a damp squib but maybe they are keeping their powder dry. I do hope Labour come up with a bit more than VAT on school fees.

    I think that what Labour is going to offer in 2023 is mainly radical-sounding things (Lords abolition, private school taxation) which don't cost much. Substantive things that cost money will be selected in 2024 in the light of circs then. There is literally nothing to be gained by rushing out promises now, though I entirely share your impatience. And changing the subject from "Tory incompetence" to "debatable Labour policy" is clearly not in our interests, as the poll in the header illustrates. We'll need to - but not yet.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,231
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Bear with me as I disappear down the Covid Conspiracy Rabbithole


    "Xi has gone from welding his citizens inside buildings to pushing free travel of Chinese citizens infected with the virus (or a new variant thereof).Xi could easily limit travel, so what is actually going on?Travel bans on Chinese flights are a must.#China"

    https://twitter.com/Jkylebass/status/1608165210157907968?s=20&t=-6el5S1PDPZfu_LgnlTO1A

    it is an astonishing volte face by the CCP. From Zero Covid to Fuck It: in a few weeks

    Is it possible they have identified a new variant which is not only highly nasty, but cannot be contained, and they want the rest of the world to suffer from it, as they suffer? I would ignore this wild possibility, if it weren't for the fact this is EXACTLY what China did with Original Covid, in early 2020. They kept the international air routes open as long as humanly possible, in the face of global opposition, precisely so they seeded it around the world, even as they CLOSED internal routes out of Wuhan/Hubei Province

    Yep, rabbit hole. We already have variants in the U.K. that cannot be contained. China is now experiencing what happens if you try and fail to suppress covid, use shit vaccines and fail to vaccinate those who need it most, and fail to update the vaccines.

    At heart most people in the U.K. have now had covid, and thus have antibodies against the whole virus, not just spike protein. This makes it a lot harder for the virus to evade immunity completely. This is not the same as neutralising antibodies - it’s the rest of the immune system. So we get lots of infections (tick) but also most people getting over it (also tick).

    There is no need to invoke a new variant to explain what is happening in China.
    Forgive me for suggesting that Xi and the Chinese Communist Party might not always act in the interests of all humanity, rather than in the narrow interests of Xi, his cronies and the Chinese regime

    I don't know what came over me
    I have to say that I share your scepticism about Xi's sudden conversion from Zero Covid to "Let's open the borders and stop all testing or other sensible precautionary measures" in 3 weeks with no preparation at all.

    I assume that the Chinese government is lying about what is going on inside the country. I also assume that there will likely be new variants and that we cannot cheerfully assume that such variants will be mild and/or easily dealt with by existing vaccines.
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,104
    EPG said:

    tlg86 said:

    FPT:

    felix said:

    Tres said:

    Jonathan said:

    As a few of us have been saying.

    "Starmer has — and this is possible to glimpse despite his opacity — always been quite left-wing. He was to the left of every leader since he was in his twenties. Except Corbyn, because there is nobody to the left of Corbyn. But he was, at least, quite comfortable with Corbyn as leader. The alternative theory posits that this wasn’t play-acting. He didn’t just say that the 2017 manifesto was a foundational document for Labour, he actually meant it. He didn’t just run as a leader from the left — mainstream, not Corbynite, but still the left — that is actually his politics.

    But on becoming leader he understood he couldn’t win an election like that. He’d have to lowball voters. It took him a while to appreciate that, but once he did he was pretty robust about it. He has been focused and committed in his work of reassurance.

    If he were to capture power he would then be able to move the country leftward, with voter assent. He would return to something closer to his natural instinct. And it would not be the left who would feel betrayed."


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/keir-starmer-may-be-more-left-wing-than-he-lets-on-82fwdr2t7

    Yawn. New Labour, New Danger. Seen this every time a Labour leader looks like winning.
    The thing about pooh-poohing the boy who cried wolf is that the wolf did eventually come.

    10 years ago, I was living on about £100 a month after housing, commuting, bills and food and only paying basic rate. I've worked very hard to get where I am now. But, because I now have a six-figure income (and that's only in the last 18 months) Labour sees no difference between me and Elon Musk - despite me having very little equity.

    You can't expect me to want to vote for a party like that. And I won't be alone.
    Please elaborate on how Labour believe you and Elon Musk are the same.
    Labour will view me as the top 1%, the privileged elite, the wealthy, calibrate their political rhetoric to match - the politics of envy - and tax me as highly as they possibly can.

    I have no doubt it will be politically rewarding for them, but I think it will be bad for the country.

    "They can't possibly be worse than this lot" is a potent campaigning line, but - again - it's an emotive one and of course they can.

    They certainly can.
    And so to avoid taxes on income you will vote for a party that is terrified of taxing the capital you don't possess.
    Labour wants to put VAT on private schools.

    My daughter is at an independent prep school that I went to when I was eight years old. It costs a fair bit but we make sacrifices. We don't go on holiday quite as often as we'd like. We don't eat out as much. But it's a tradeoff we're willing to make. Of course, we're not on the breadline, but we don't lead the lifestyle some of our fellow middle-class professionals do - but it's a choice.

    The school was founded in 1936. It only has 210 pupils. It specialises in outdoor education. I acquired a lifelong love of hiking, camping and archery from it. My passion for design and technology too. Some of the teachers who taught me are still there now. The current headmaster is a real brick and works his socks off. He's a good egg. My daughter loves it there. She's settled, has lots of friends and is very happy. Her and her friends virtually skip into school. They play and learn outside every day.

    At weekends and holidays it throws its doors open to schoolkids in the local area, and runs adventure camps for inner city schoolkids. It also runs Chinese and Russian language courses that attract children from all over the region, to learn, facilities they struggle to find elsewhere.

    Labour's policies would target schools like this. We wouldn't be able to afford the increase in the fees. We'd be faced with wrenching our daughter out of a school she loves and her friends - for us, this is very very personal.

    The survival of the school itself would be in question. And, the benefits it offers to children and the wider community would be lost too. And, for what? So we can plough our extra money into consumption and higher house prices instead, and overburden our local state school instead?

    It might put a smile on the faces of some Labour activists but when it comes to the next election and you can't fathom why everyone doesn't think Labour is the best thing since sliced bread and is desperate to vote for them - think of us.
    I'm afraid that whole post has swayed me not a jot.
    Of course it won't - you're angry at the Tories - not without cause and have convinced yourself, as have so many others, that Starmer is moderate centre-left who won't frighten the horses while trhowing you bits of red meat. And you wish to bathe in the warm red glow of supporting a party that cares, that will probably return the the UKto the EU and do all and only nice things. You need to re-read Animal Farm - next time it's never different.
    "angry with the Tories" doesn't begin to cover it.

    Starmer is, I fear moderate centre-left. I suspect he will be far too moderate to achieve much good.

    I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable.

    Casino told us some time ago what his
    salary is; it's a good salary and no doubt well-deserved. Since the government judges that an adult can live on £335 pm, a couple on £525 pm, and a child on £245 pm I suspect Casino will find a way to fund the
    VAT on his daughter's school fees.

    But do you want him to be able to afford it? It sounds to me that your objection is the unfair advantage his daughter will have in life.

    I'll repeat the salient point from my post: "I honestly bear no ill will towards either Casino or his daughter but to keep the VAT exemption and charitable status of private education, which is clearly a service offered for fees, is unsustainable. "
    Because the charitable benefit is from the use of the facilities during weekends and holidays. If the increase in taxes makes that non-viable then charitable benefit is removed.
    Eton had a new sports hall built whilst the school around the corner was asking for donations to buy teaching supplies. How is that fair
    Because it was privately funded by donations from taxed income (I assume).

    The charitable aspect - and Eton is great about this - is from sharing the facilities with local schools and residents for no cost. So those kids get access to facilities that they wouldn’t otherwise have in the state sector.


    The parents can just send their kids to state schools and fund a charitable sports hall out of altruism.
    Of course they can.

    But rightly or wrongly - as anyone in the third sector will tell you - fund raising is a lot easier when you can make a personal connection with the donor.

    They could. But they won’t
  • Options
    EPGEPG Posts: 6,048
    So the PB six-figure earner position is: the VAT exemption is worth it because it generates occasional community use of sports halls, mostly in already-wealthy areas, funded by parents who are at the breadline and will have to pull their kids out if fees rise by 1k or 2k. It's a narrative but not one which I think is systemically relevant across the UK.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,627
    When the idea of VAT on school fees was floated, there was a funny exchange between some Labour councillors and the local private schools.

    When the private schools bursars pointed out that they would be assisting parents with the increases in fees that would result - and that charitable work came after costs…. The howling was funny.

    Apparently they (the councillors) thought that free use of facilities + employees time was a a guaranteed thing. So they were told that the swimming coaches might not be available to teach - though free access to the pool would continue…

    As the headmaster of one school put it - “We will count the VAT as our contribution.”
  • Options

    ...

    Andy_JS said:

    Why don't we all get a tax rebate on our uni fees?

    What about the majority who don't go to university?
    What about the majority that don't go to private schools?
    Another irony is once we attain our A levels from private and state school alike we are all thrown in the same mix. State sector scumbag filth debutanting ladies from Marlborough College (or Malvern, Cheltenham and Rodene). It shouldn't be allowed.
    The posh boarding school girls love a bit of a working class rough. That was my experience anyway.
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,335
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Bear with me as I disappear down the Covid Conspiracy Rabbithole


    "Xi has gone from welding his citizens inside buildings to pushing free travel of Chinese citizens infected with the virus (or a new variant thereof).Xi could easily limit travel, so what is actually going on?Travel bans on Chinese flights are a must.#China"

    https://twitter.com/Jkylebass/status/1608165210157907968?s=20&t=-6el5S1PDPZfu_LgnlTO1A

    it is an astonishing volte face by the CCP. From Zero Covid to Fuck It: in a few weeks

    Is it possible they have identified a new variant which is not only highly nasty, but cannot be contained, and they want the rest of the world to suffer from it, as they suffer? I would ignore this wild possibility, if it weren't for the fact this is EXACTLY what China did with Original Covid, in early 2020. They kept the international air routes open as long as humanly possible, in the face of global opposition, precisely so they seeded it around the world, even as they CLOSED internal routes out of Wuhan/Hubei Province

    Yep, rabbit hole. We already have variants in the U.K. that cannot be contained. China is now experiencing what happens if you try and fail to suppress covid, use shit vaccines and fail to vaccinate those who need it most, and fail to update the vaccines.

    At heart most people in the U.K. have now had covid, and thus have antibodies against the whole virus, not just spike protein. This makes it a lot harder for the virus to evade immunity completely. This is not the same as neutralising antibodies - it’s the rest of the immune system. So we get lots of infections (tick) but also most people getting over it (also tick).

    There is no need to invoke a new variant to explain what is happening in China.
    Forgive me for suggesting that Xi and the Chinese Communist Party might not always act in the interests of all humanity, rather than in the narrow interests of Xi, his cronies and the Chinese regime

    I don't know what came over me
    I think your analysis of what they did in 2020 is absolutely on the money. It’s possible you are on to something now, but I think the narrative of the Chinese watching the World Cup, realising the rest of the world is no longer doing what China is re covid and finally cracking is most likely.
    Yes, I agree, which is why I used the word "rabbit-hole". I am not sure of this, just rightly cautious and suspicious

    This is a time for the Precautionary Principle. China "suddenly" wants to open up, as does Hong Kong, after three years of telling us all to fuck off and stay away, following a virus THEY leaked (out of China, for sure, out of a lab, probably)? Hmmmmmm

    We should politely tell them to do one, for three months. No flights from China, no Chinese nationals, until the spring, and until we know more about their exit wave. Let us take care of our own - as they did

    That would require the world to do that, not just us.
    We could at least start. America and Italy have now suddenly imposed tests etc

    Just stop flights and introduce travel bans from China. It's not hard. They are going through an unprecedented exit wave. The risk to us is palpable

    NOT doing this because we are scared of being accused of "racism" is puerile
    Who is suggesting we are not doing this because racism? Only you, that I can see. If we were under Nicola Sturgeon’s benevolent dictatorship and were still trying to suppress covid then of course we would ban the flights.
    Happily we don’t live in a mad Scottish nationalist wet dream.
This discussion has been closed.