Perhaps. But Netflix do have a 'documentary' featuring a black Cleopatra.
I'm aware quite a few cultural depictions, in drama, art and documentary form, of a very northern European looking Jesus. No one on the right gets all het up about those. Funny that.
Jesus would most likely have looked like a present day Palestinian.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
Private schools aren't businesses and most typically operate on very tight margins where they just about break even.
Where do the think the extra 20% is coming from if not from the school's reserves or the patents? Thin air?
Same old Labour.
They couldn't run a whelk stall. They have no ides about business.
At least they don’t want to f*** business, however.
Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.
The cultural/values stuff is properly a bigger barrier than the microeconomics these days, to be honest, but to some extent there's an overlap between the two - and it's a polarising one.
Business needs to navigate this better, as do politicians.
“Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.”
Whaaaaaaaaaaat are you trying to say 🥹
That’s like invading Martians blowing up congress, and the president trying to spin at least half your government is still there functioning okay delivering the policies you voted for.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
Private schools aren't businesses and most typically operate on very tight margins where they just about break even.
Where do the think the extra 20% is coming from if not from the school's reserves or the patents? Thin air?
Same old Labour.
They couldn't run a whelk stall. They have no ides about business.
At least they don’t want to f*** business, however.
Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.
The cultural/values stuff is properly a bigger barrier than the microeconomics these days, to be honest, but to some extent there's an overlap between the two - and it's a polarising one.
Business needs to navigate this better, as do politicians.
Outside of the Brexit controversies? That’s like saying that outside of the mass slaughter, Genghis Khan was a nice fella. Brexit is the Conservatives’ defining economic policy. It’s still where they run to at the drop of a hat.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
Private schools aren't businesses and most typically operate on very tight margins where they just about break even.
Where do the think the extra 20% is coming from if not from the school's reserves or the patents? Thin air?
Same old Labour.
They couldn't run a whelk stall. They have no ides about business.
At least they don’t want to f*** business, however.
Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.
The cultural/values stuff is properly a bigger barrier than the microeconomics these days, to be honest, but to some extent there's an overlap between the two - and it's a polarising one.
Business needs to navigate this better, as do politicians.
“Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.”
Whaaaaaaaaaaat are you trying to say 🥹
That’s like invading Martians blowing up congress, and the president trying to spin at least half your government is still there functioning okay delivering the policies you voted for.
I think the real question is: what are you trying to say?
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
Private schools aren't businesses and most typically operate on very tight margins where they just about break even.
Where do the think the extra 20% is coming from if not from the school's reserves or the patents? Thin air?
Same old Labour.
They couldn't run a whelk stall. They have no ides about business.
At least they don’t want to f*** business, however.
Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.
The cultural/values stuff is properly a bigger barrier than the microeconomics these days, to be honest, but to some extent there's an overlap between the two - and it's a polarising one.
Business needs to navigate this better, as do politicians.
Outside of the Brexit controversies? That’s like saying that outside of the mass slaughter, Genghis Khan was a nice fella. Brexit is the Conservatives’ defining economic policy. It’s still where they run to at the drop of a hat.
What did the Tories say? “F*ck business “, yes that was it.
We are at the beginning of the end of one such phenomenon. I think the cultural left peaked in 2020. Listen to the derisive connotation of the word “woke” now. Look at newspapers, once all-in on this stuff, edge back a bit.
Search “Learn to love ambiguity” if you’re not a subscriber
Several intelligent people on the Left have made this journey, Matthew Syed, Trevor Phillips and now Janan Ganesh.
There will be others.
No! No not having it.
I suggested Ganesh was intelligent person of the left on PB, and I got torn to shreds thinking he was ever of the left. I havn’t forgotten that. If there is any justice in this world you need to be torn to shreds right now.
We know None of Syed, Phillips or even long time darling of the right Ganesh are voting Starmer at the next election?
Some of your posts I find deeply confusing, containing attempts at seriousness, sarcasm and humour all in one mish-mash.
What you think in your head doesn't always come out clearly in what you write in your posts.
That’s a huge presumption how clear and tidy my head is when my mouth starts moving about 😆
It’s all there in PBs undeleteable uneditable annals - I once suggested Ganesh is left wing and didn’t get away with it.
We are at the beginning of the end of one such phenomenon. I think the cultural left peaked in 2020. Listen to the derisive connotation of the word “woke” now. Look at newspapers, once all-in on this stuff, edge back a bit.
Search “Learn to love ambiguity” if you’re not a subscriber
Several intelligent people on the Left have made this journey, Matthew Syed, Trevor Phillips and now Janan Ganesh.
There will be others.
The cultural left 'peaked' in 2020 in the sense that this was the point it essentially won; IE it became the establishment/status quo.
People may look for ways of defining themselves against the establishment/status quo, but that isn't the same is the power of the status/quo establishment fading, to the contrary; in many ways it is getting more entrenched.
Sure, with 10 years of right wing government and Brexit.
The Right's insecurity and paranoia about its own countries culture is something to behold.
The March Hare mad PB faithful have come out swinging this morning. Scant evidence to support their invective, but when does lack of evidence ever hold back a strident partisan opinion?
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
Private schools aren't businesses and most typically operate on very tight margins where they just about break even.
Where do the think the extra 20% is coming from if not from the school's reserves or the patents? Thin air?
Same old Labour.
They couldn't run a whelk stall. They have no ides about business.
At least they don’t want to f*** business, however.
Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.
The cultural/values stuff is properly a bigger barrier than the microeconomics these days, to be honest, but to some extent there's an overlap between the two - and it's a polarising one.
Business needs to navigate this better, as do politicians.
Outside of the Brexit controversies? That’s like saying that outside of the mass slaughter, Genghis Khan was a nice fella. Brexit is the Conservatives’ defining economic policy. It’s still where they run to at the drop of a hat.
It's like poking a hornet's nest with Brexit, isn't it, and just makes people mad?
It's purely a process of political independence from the European Union. Once that is put aside everything on tax, regulation, labour reforms and trade missions is entirely up for discussion.
There is nothing anti-business in any of that, but it does have a political boundary with respect to the EU.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
Private schools aren't businesses and most typically operate on very tight margins where they just about break even.
Where do the think the extra 20% is coming from if not from the school's reserves or the patents? Thin air?
Same old Labour.
They couldn't run a whelk stall. They have no ides about business.
At least they don’t want to f*** business, however.
Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.
The cultural/values stuff is properly a bigger barrier than the microeconomics these days, to be honest, but to some extent there's an overlap between the two - and it's a polarising one.
Business needs to navigate this better, as do politicians.
Outside of the Brexit controversies? That’s like saying that outside of the mass slaughter, Genghis Khan was a nice fella. Brexit is the Conservatives’ defining economic policy. It’s still where they run to at the drop of a hat.
What did the Tories say? “F*ck business “, yes that was it.
Mr. Royale, quite. I, for one, was shocked that Will Smith's wife was not faithful. To history.
It’s a real slap in the face for those who want realistic historical depictions.
I dont care how realistic a depiction is, unless the makers are claiming realism or theres a cultural trend to so called realistic casting which causes mini scandals like a gay character (not even a real person) being played by a straight actor or vice versa, in which case you need a strong basis for what is claimed.
If you want to just have creative freedom to do what you want then all the better. Just say so.
Look, this is definitely what JC looked like.
Doesn't one of the Claudius books suggest that Christ was actually the by-blow of a Greek mercenary? A visual depiction of the result of this union obviously.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
Private schools aren't businesses and most typically operate on very tight margins where they just about break even.
Where do the think the extra 20% is coming from if not from the school's reserves or the patents? Thin air?
Same old Labour.
They couldn't run a whelk stall. They have no ides about business.
At least they don’t want to f*** business, however.
Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.
The cultural/values stuff is properly a bigger barrier than the microeconomics these days, to be honest, but to some extent there's an overlap between the two - and it's a polarising one.
Business needs to navigate this better, as do politicians.
Outside of the Brexit controversies? That’s like saying that outside of the mass slaughter, Genghis Khan was a nice fella. Brexit is the Conservatives’ defining economic policy. It’s still where they run to at the drop of a hat.
What did the Tories say? “F*ck business “, yes that was it.
Fans of Family Guy may be entertained by the Freisler of Guantanamo Bay having a press secretary called Bryan Griffin. He sounds like the MAGA version of the pompous, self important, woke Brian.
‘Love God, Limit Government’
De Santis clearly making links with the right of the Conservative Party. Only really Farage still backs Trump in the UK though
Yep, it’s notable that the freedom-loving Tory right this week embraced both De Santis and Meloni when they made visits here. The National Conservative movement also seems to be gaining a lot of ground, with its interesting views about freedom and democracy. The next Tory leadership contest will be fascinating.
What all Conservatives want is an effective leader.
What I suspect all Labour supporters want is the same.
We are at the beginning of the end of one such phenomenon. I think the cultural left peaked in 2020. Listen to the derisive connotation of the word “woke” now. Look at newspapers, once all-in on this stuff, edge back a bit.
Search “Learn to love ambiguity” if you’re not a subscriber
Several intelligent people on the Left have made this journey, Matthew Syed, Trevor Phillips and now Janan Ganesh.
There will be others.
'Several intelligent people on the Left have made this journey'? You make it sound like the rest of us have yet to see the light.
The truth is that most (the vast majority) on the left have never bought into the more ridiculous examples of 'cultural left' dogma (e.g. 'sanitising' Roald Dahl books) any more than most on the right don't buy in to the more ridiculous examples of 'cultural right' dogma (e.g. banning Michelangelo's David).
But it suits us both, left and right, to highlight the idiocies of the others side's extemists.
I think this is an example of Margaret Thatcher's maxim that whenever you challenge a consensus you will be fought viciously and opposed every step of the way, until the change occurs, following which it becomes embedded and exactly the same people say it was inevitable and would have happened anyway.
It requires intellectual self-confidence to go against the consensus of your peers. The difference is Janan is leading the way. Others are following in its wake.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
That frustrating moment when you realise the Opposition are just as clueless as the government about education.
There are many private schools that will not notice. Eton. Harrow. Roedean. Clifton. Cheltenham.
There are others that will certainly have to raise fees and may well go bust.
Almost all in poorer areas. Round here, Denstone may just about survive, but the rest won't.
Now that may be what is intended. And it's a legitimate debate to have although I think they're going about it the wrong way (you want to eliminate private schools? Cut class sizes in the state sector by a big number).
But if you take this blind approach to it then you won't prepare for the influx of pupils to a state sector already creaking at the seams. And that will cause far more problems for education than the existence of private schools did.
Exactly, Labour's policy won't hit the grand public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and Charterhouse and Westminster where the parents are mainly multi millionaires and the foreign super rich.
What it will hit is smaller private schools which survive on a tight budget and whose parents are small business owners, police officers, teachers themselves etc who scrimp and save and avoid foreign holidays and new cars to pay the fees
Like my daughter's school - which has sent out a letter to all parents about the threat and it's concerns on the impact on the school, to manage expectations.
It's a downright idiotic policy, typical of Starmer's tactical triangulation rather than proper leadership, and means Labour are a clear and present danger to my family.
I've said before that Labours policies on private schools is unjust and a bad policy in many ways, but....
I have a dual national (EU) family which was never an issue when we were in the EU. I think Brexit it has cost my own family about £5k due to our circumstances, to secure for ourselves the same rights and freedoms that we had before by becoming dual nationals, and we were relatively fortunate. Others, not so much.
The fact is that this was never a big political issue because it affected so few people. I think it will be the same with labour and their punitive policies on private schools. It just won't affect enough people to be salient, and will appeal to a bigoted minority of voters. So it is just really a case of business as usual, sadly.
Mr. Pointer, I believe the terms used at the time were longest/deepest.
Are you disputing that Labour ended their last period of office shortly after the biggest recession we've ever had? How would you assess that recession?
Well, just by looking at an obscure resource called Wikipedia, I can see that just in the past 100 years:
- The 2020 covid recession was deeper. - The 1919–1926 depression was longer and deeper. - The 1930-1931 Great Depression was longer. - The 1980s recession was as long. - The 1990s recession was as long.
Apart from those though, sure, 2008 was the biggest recession we've ever had (in the past 100 years).
I guess we should just be pleased we’re not yet at the burning stage.
Have you read that article? It appears to be the state of Florida saying certain books aren't appropriate in state schools. It's hardly outlawing them. And it's only happening because the cultural left is pushing books in schools which the vast majority of parents would prefer them not to.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
Private schools aren't businesses and most typically operate on very tight margins where they just about break even.
Where do the think the extra 20% is coming from if not from the school's reserves or the patents? Thin air?
Same old Labour.
They couldn't run a whelk stall. They have no ides about business.
At least they don’t want to f*** business, however.
Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.
The cultural/values stuff is properly a bigger barrier than the microeconomics these days, to be honest, but to some extent there's an overlap between the two - and it's a polarising one.
Business needs to navigate this better, as do politicians.
Outside of the Brexit controversies? That’s like saying that outside of the mass slaughter, Genghis Khan was a nice fella. Brexit is the Conservatives’ defining economic policy. It’s still where they run to at the drop of a hat.
What did the Tories say? “F*ck business “, yes that was it.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
That frustrating moment when you realise the Opposition are just as clueless as the government about education.
There are many private schools that will not notice. Eton. Harrow. Roedean. Clifton. Cheltenham.
There are others that will certainly have to raise fees and may well go bust.
Almost all in poorer areas. Round here, Denstone may just about survive, but the rest won't.
Now that may be what is intended. And it's a legitimate debate to have although I think they're going about it the wrong way (you want to eliminate private schools? Cut class sizes in the state sector by a big number).
But if you take this blind approach to it then you won't prepare for the influx of pupils to a state sector already creaking at the seams. And that will cause far more problems for education than the existence of private schools did.
Exactly, Labour's policy won't hit the grand public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and Charterhouse and Westminster where the parents are mainly multi millionaires and the foreign super rich.
What it will hit is smaller private schools which survive on a tight budget and whose parents are small business owners, police officers, teachers themselves etc who scrimp and save and avoid foreign holidays and new cars to pay the fees
Like my daughter's school - which has sent out a letter to all parents about the threat and it's concerns on the impact on the school, to manage expectations.
It's a downright idiotic policy, typical of Starmer's tactical triangulation rather than proper leadership, and means Labour are a clear and present danger to my family.
Private education is like alternative medicine. By all means choose it if you want, but don’t expect the state to subsidise it. With the public finances in such a state, there are other priorities.
God, this is boring.
Get this through your head: it is NOT subsidised. Those who use it are actually subsidising the state. It's exactly the other way round.
Of course, you're very intelligent and you know this. You just feel obliged to support and advocate Labour's policy on this as an ex-parliamentary candidate.
Even you will be secretly embarrassed by it, even if you don't admit it on here.
I guess we should just be pleased we’re not yet at the burning stage.
So does the activist Left, and no platforms as well.
One feeds off the other. So why feed the fire by taking sides?
You’re right. We shouldn’t feed the fire by taking sides. And that’s why Kemi Badenoch took the principled position of not meeting DeSantis… oh, hold on… what’s that? She *did* meet him?
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
Private schools aren't businesses and most typically operate on very tight margins where they just about break even.
Where do the think the extra 20% is coming from if not from the school's reserves or the patents? Thin air?
Same old Labour.
They couldn't run a whelk stall. They have no ides about business.
At least they don’t want to f*** business, however.
Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.
The cultural/values stuff is properly a bigger barrier than the microeconomics these days, to be honest, but to some extent there's an overlap between the two - and it's a polarising one.
Business needs to navigate this better, as do politicians.
Outside of the Brexit controversies? That’s like saying that outside of the mass slaughter, Genghis Khan was a nice fella. Brexit is the Conservatives’ defining economic policy. It’s still where they run to at the drop of a hat.
What did the Tories say? “F*ck business “, yes that was it.
I'm not sure this doesn't help rather than harm Haley ?
DeSantis allies go to war with an unlikely foe: Nikki Haley https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/28/desantis-nikki-haley-2024-election-00094496 ...DeSantis is comfortably in second place in most surveys, trailing Trump but well ahead of the other Republicans in the field. But in recent weeks, he has lost ground, with Trump picking up endorsements from several Republican Congress members in Florida and with some major donors expressing reservations about the Florida governor. Two recent polls of South Carolina GOP voters showed Trump far ahead of the pack and Haley only narrowly behind DeSantis. A survey conducted earlier this month by National Public Affairs, a Republican firm co-founded by Clark, found DeSantis at 21 percent, with Haley at 19 percent. A Winthrop University poll taken several weeks earlier showed similar results, with DeSantis at 20 percent and Haley at 18 percent...
Haley seems like a much more plausible candidate to take on Trump than DeSantis. She has a proper contrast with Trump because she looks young and different, but also she negotiated the Trump era quite cannily and she can still appeal to people who liked Trump but think it's time for a change.
Also her state is primary #3, which is a good position to be in: The non-Trump field will probably need Iowa and NH to consolidate since there's one Trump and many non-Trumps, so it's going to be hard for any challenger to score a win over Trump until then.
Haley has about as much chance of winning the GOP nomination next year as Jeremy Hunt does of being the next Conservative leader. She also doesn't have the appeal to evangelicals in Iowa Pence does if you want a non Trump non De Santis candidate
Evangelicals in Iowa don't seem like a great place to fish for anti-Trump voters?
Perhaps. But Netflix do have a 'documentary' featuring a black Cleopatra.
I'm aware quite a few cultural depictions, in drama, art and documentary form, of a very northern European looking Jesus. No one on the right gets all het up about those. Funny that.
Seem to remember seeing a viral clip of some Fox news presenter being outraged at Jesus NOT being portrayed as white.
Perhaps. But Netflix do have a 'documentary' featuring a black Cleopatra.
I'm aware quite a few cultural depictions, in drama, art and documentary form, of a very northern European looking Jesus. No one on the right gets all het up about those. Funny that.
Jesus would most likely have looked like a present day Palestinian.
Why do most modern Jews not look Palestinian? That implies to me that there were conversions to Judaism among European-looking populations at some point. But that's only a hazy guess.
We are at the beginning of the end of one such phenomenon. I think the cultural left peaked in 2020. Listen to the derisive connotation of the word “woke” now. Look at newspapers, once all-in on this stuff, edge back a bit.
Search “Learn to love ambiguity” if you’re not a subscriber
Several intelligent people on the Left have made this journey, Matthew Syed, Trevor Phillips and now Janan Ganesh.
There will be others.
'Several intelligent people on the Left have made this journey'? You make it sound like the rest of us have yet to see the light.
The truth is that most (the vast majority) on the left have never bought into the more ridiculous examples of 'cultural left' dogma (e.g. 'sanitising' Roald Dahl books) any more than most on the right don't buy in to the more ridiculous examples of 'cultural right' dogma (e.g. banning Michelangelo's David).
But it suits us both, left and right, to highlight the idiocies of the others side's extemists.
I think this is an example of Margaret Thatcher's maxim that whenever you challenge a consensus you will be fought viciously and opposed every step of the way, until the change occurs, following which it becomes embedded and exactly the same people say it was inevitable and would have happened anyway.
It requires intellectual self-confidence to go against the consensus of your peers. The difference is Janan is leading the way. Others are following in its wake.
You don't have it.
Do you?
Yep.
Then I look forward to you demonstrating intellectual self-confidence and going against the consensus of your Tory peers.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
Private schools aren't businesses and most typically operate on very tight margins where they just about break even.
Where do the think the extra 20% is coming from if not from the school's reserves or the patents? Thin air?
Same old Labour.
They couldn't run a whelk stall. They have no ides about business.
At least they don’t want to f*** business, however.
Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.
The cultural/values stuff is properly a bigger barrier than the microeconomics these days, to be honest, but to some extent there's an overlap between the two - and it's a polarising one.
Business needs to navigate this better, as do politicians.
“Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.”
Whaaaaaaaaaaat are you trying to say 🥹
That’s like invading Martians blowing up congress, and the president trying to spin at least half your government is still there functioning okay delivering the policies you voted for.
I think the real question is: what are you trying to say?
No.
“Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.”
The real question is, what are you trying to say 😆
“Aside from the murders, what a fine doctor Shipman was! Done wonders for my Bert’s lumbago.”
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
That frustrating moment when you realise the Opposition are just as clueless as the government about education.
There are many private schools that will not notice. Eton. Harrow. Roedean. Clifton. Cheltenham.
There are others that will certainly have to raise fees and may well go bust.
Almost all in poorer areas. Round here, Denstone may just about survive, but the rest won't.
Now that may be what is intended. And it's a legitimate debate to have although I think they're going about it the wrong way (you want to eliminate private schools? Cut class sizes in the state sector by a big number).
But if you take this blind approach to it then you won't prepare for the influx of pupils to a state sector already creaking at the seams. And that will cause far more problems for education than the existence of private schools did.
Exactly, Labour's policy won't hit the grand public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and Charterhouse and Westminster where the parents are mainly multi millionaires and the foreign super rich.
What it will hit is smaller private schools which survive on a tight budget and whose parents are small business owners, police officers, teachers themselves etc who scrimp and save and avoid foreign holidays and new cars to pay the fees
Like my daughter's school - which has sent out a letter to all parents about the threat and it's concerns on the impact on the school, to manage expectations.
It's a downright idiotic policy, typical of Starmer's tactical triangulation rather than proper leadership, and means Labour are a clear and present danger to my family.
Private education is like alternative medicine. By all means choose it if you want, but don’t expect the state to subsidise it. With the public finances in such a state, there are other priorities.
God, this is boring.
Get this through your head: it is NOT subsidised. Those who use it are actually subsidising the state. It's exactly the other way round.
Of course, you're very intelligent and you know this. You just feel obliged to support and advocate Labour's policy on this as an ex-parliamentary candidate.
Even you will be secretly embarrassed by it, even if you don't admit it on here.
No it’s fine. Private education cannot be a priority at the moment. There are more important things.
Personally I’m befuddled that anyone would choose private education over a good state education, but that’s up to you.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
That frustrating moment when you realise the Opposition are just as clueless as the government about education.
There are many private schools that will not notice. Eton. Harrow. Roedean. Clifton. Cheltenham.
There are others that will certainly have to raise fees and may well go bust.
Almost all in poorer areas. Round here, Denstone may just about survive, but the rest won't.
Now that may be what is intended. And it's a legitimate debate to have although I think they're going about it the wrong way (you want to eliminate private schools? Cut class sizes in the state sector by a big number).
But if you take this blind approach to it then you won't prepare for the influx of pupils to a state sector already creaking at the seams. And that will cause far more problems for education than the existence of private schools did.
Exactly, Labour's policy won't hit the grand public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and Charterhouse and Westminster where the parents are mainly multi millionaires and the foreign super rich.
What it will hit is smaller private schools which survive on a tight budget and whose parents are small business owners, police officers, teachers themselves etc who scrimp and save and avoid foreign holidays and new cars to pay the fees
Like my daughter's school - which has sent out a letter to all parents about the threat and it's concerns on the impact on the school, to manage expectations.
It's a downright idiotic policy, typical of Starmer's tactical triangulation rather than proper leadership, and means Labour are a clear and present danger to my family.
Private education is like alternative medicine. By all means choose it if you want, but don’t expect the state to subsidise it. With the public finances in such a state, there are other priorities.
The schools will pass the VAT on and the parents can just spend less money on wine and cashmere bed socks to pay for it. Fuck them.
We are at the beginning of the end of one such phenomenon. I think the cultural left peaked in 2020. Listen to the derisive connotation of the word “woke” now. Look at newspapers, once all-in on this stuff, edge back a bit.
Search “Learn to love ambiguity” if you’re not a subscriber
Several intelligent people on the Left have made this journey, Matthew Syed, Trevor Phillips and now Janan Ganesh.
There will be others.
'Several intelligent people on the Left have made this journey'? You make it sound like the rest of us have yet to see the light.
The truth is that most (the vast majority) on the left have never bought into the more ridiculous examples of 'cultural left' dogma (e.g. 'sanitising' Roald Dahl books) any more than most on the right don't buy in to the more ridiculous examples of 'cultural right' dogma (e.g. banning Michelangelo's David).
But it suits us both, left and right, to highlight the idiocies of the others side's extemists.
I think this is an example of Margaret Thatcher's maxim that whenever you challenge a consensus you will be fought viciously and opposed every step of the way, until the change occurs, following which it becomes embedded and exactly the same people say it was inevitable and would have happened anyway.
It requires intellectual self-confidence to go against the consensus of your peers. The difference is Janan is leading the way. Others are following in its wake.
You don't have it.
Do you?
Yep.
Then I look forward to you demonstrating intellectual self-confidence and going against the consensus of your Tory peers.
Maybe supporting VAT on school fees?
No, that would make me as intellectually limited as you seem to be.
I have supported going against the interests of the Tory base and spending more on state education, science and defence and taxing capital more and workers less. And building more houses. I also support more bilateral and collaborative deals with the EU. I accept inclusion to be fair to individuals and build a common patriotic identity in Britain, but I don't support identity politics.
As for all my views I stand ready to revise them and recalibrate based upon the evidence of what would be best for the country and improve our quality of life.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
Private schools aren't businesses and most typically operate on very tight margins where they just about break even.
Where do the think the extra 20% is coming from if not from the school's reserves or the patents? Thin air?
Same old Labour.
They couldn't run a whelk stall. They have no ides about business.
At least they don’t want to f*** business, however.
Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.
The cultural/values stuff is properly a bigger barrier than the microeconomics these days, to be honest, but to some extent there's an overlap between the two - and it's a polarising one.
Business needs to navigate this better, as do politicians.
“Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.”
Whaaaaaaaaaaat are you trying to say 🥹
That’s like invading Martians blowing up congress, and the president trying to spin at least half your government is still there functioning okay delivering the policies you voted for.
I think the real question is: what are you trying to say?
No.
“Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.”
The real question is, what are you trying to say 😆
“Aside from the murders, what a fine doctor Shipman was! Done wonders for my Bert’s lumbago.”
Besides, even then it's more complicated than that.
Would a Party Of Business make it almost impossible for Cambridge tech firms by giving in to Nimbies at every opportunity?
Increasingly, the Conservatives are the party of the retired (and remember, that's only happened in the last decade.) People who have made their pile, want to protect it, and see no reason why anyone else should be helped to make theirs.
I guess we should just be pleased we’re not yet at the burning stage.
Have you read that article? It appears to be the state of Florida saying certain books aren't appropriate in state schools. It's hardly outlawing them. And it's only happening because the cultural left is pushing books in schools which the vast majority of parents would prefer them not to.
Here’s a list of books banned in one Florida county: https://pen.org/these-books-are-banned-in-martin-county-florida/ Lots of Jodi Picoult and Toni Morrison. What exactly about these books are so dangerous? Is Nobel laureate Toni Morrison what you mean by books pushed by the cultural left?
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
That frustrating moment when you realise the Opposition are just as clueless as the government about education.
There are many private schools that will not notice. Eton. Harrow. Roedean. Clifton. Cheltenham.
There are others that will certainly have to raise fees and may well go bust.
Almost all in poorer areas. Round here, Denstone may just about survive, but the rest won't.
Now that may be what is intended. And it's a legitimate debate to have although I think they're going about it the wrong way (you want to eliminate private schools? Cut class sizes in the state sector by a big number).
But if you take this blind approach to it then you won't prepare for the influx of pupils to a state sector already creaking at the seams. And that will cause far more problems for education than the existence of private schools did.
Exactly, Labour's policy won't hit the grand public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and Charterhouse and Westminster where the parents are mainly multi millionaires and the foreign super rich.
What it will hit is smaller private schools which survive on a tight budget and whose parents are small business owners, police officers, teachers themselves etc who scrimp and save and avoid foreign holidays and new cars to pay the fees
Like my daughter's school - which has sent out a letter to all parents about the threat and it's concerns on the impact on the school, to manage expectations.
It's a downright idiotic policy, typical of Starmer's tactical triangulation rather than proper leadership, and means Labour are a clear and present danger to my family.
Private education is like alternative medicine. By all means choose it if you want, but don’t expect the state to subsidise it. With the public finances in such a state, there are other priorities.
God, this is boring.
Get this through your head: it is NOT subsidised. Those who use it are actually subsidising the state. It's exactly the other way round.
Of course, you're very intelligent and you know this. You just feel obliged to support and advocate Labour's policy on this as an ex-parliamentary candidate.
Even you will be secretly embarrassed by it, even if you don't admit it on here.
No it’s fine. Private education cannot be a priority at the moment. There are more important things.
Personally I’m befuddled that anyone would choose private education over a good state education, but that’s up to you.
Lots of people choose it. It's not an irrational choice, as parents believe they are giving their children a head start over the majority of other children - which parent wouldn't want that if they could afford it?
Unfortunately it seems very clear to me that the widespread existence of private schools is very bad for society.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
That frustrating moment when you realise the Opposition are just as clueless as the government about education.
There are many private schools that will not notice. Eton. Harrow. Roedean. Clifton. Cheltenham.
There are others that will certainly have to raise fees and may well go bust.
Almost all in poorer areas. Round here, Denstone may just about survive, but the rest won't.
Now that may be what is intended. And it's a legitimate debate to have although I think they're going about it the wrong way (you want to eliminate private schools? Cut class sizes in the state sector by a big number).
But if you take this blind approach to it then you won't prepare for the influx of pupils to a state sector already creaking at the seams. And that will cause far more problems for education than the existence of private schools did.
Exactly, Labour's policy won't hit the grand public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and Charterhouse and Westminster where the parents are mainly multi millionaires and the foreign super rich.
What it will hit is smaller private schools which survive on a tight budget and whose parents are small business owners, police officers, teachers themselves etc who scrimp and save and avoid foreign holidays and new cars to pay the fees
Like my daughter's school - which has sent out a letter to all parents about the threat and it's concerns on the impact on the school, to manage expectations.
It's a downright idiotic policy, typical of Starmer's tactical triangulation rather than proper leadership, and means Labour are a clear and present danger to my family.
Private education is like alternative medicine. By all means choose it if you want, but don’t expect the state to subsidise it. With the public finances in such a state, there are other priorities.
God, this is boring.
Get this through your head: it is NOT subsidised. Those who use it are actually subsidising the state. It's exactly the other way round.
Of course, you're very intelligent and you know this. You just feel obliged to support and advocate Labour's policy on this as an ex-parliamentary candidate.
Even you will be secretly embarrassed by it, even if you don't admit it on here.
Yes, my opposition to Labour's policy on this is largely selfish: it will make my kids' state school education worse. Secondary schools in Trafford are already full. My oldest two, fortunately, have places, but my youngest is only 8. If Labour introduce this before she gets to 11 then demand for state education here is going to significantly exceed supply as you will no longer get the c. 7% going to private schools to ease the pressure. Even if the intention is a schools building programme, it will be years before those places come on stream.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
That frustrating moment when you realise the Opposition are just as clueless as the government about education.
There are many private schools that will not notice. Eton. Harrow. Roedean. Clifton. Cheltenham.
There are others that will certainly have to raise fees and may well go bust.
Almost all in poorer areas. Round here, Denstone may just about survive, but the rest won't.
Now that may be what is intended. And it's a legitimate debate to have although I think they're going about it the wrong way (you want to eliminate private schools? Cut class sizes in the state sector by a big number).
But if you take this blind approach to it then you won't prepare for the influx of pupils to a state sector already creaking at the seams. And that will cause far more problems for education than the existence of private schools did.
Exactly, Labour's policy won't hit the grand public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and Charterhouse and Westminster where the parents are mainly multi millionaires and the foreign super rich.
What it will hit is smaller private schools which survive on a tight budget and whose parents are small business owners, police officers, teachers themselves etc who scrimp and save and avoid foreign holidays and new cars to pay the fees
Like my daughter's school - which has sent out a letter to all parents about the threat and it's concerns on the impact on the school, to manage expectations.
It's a downright idiotic policy, typical of Starmer's tactical triangulation rather than proper leadership, and means Labour are a clear and present danger to my family.
Private education is like alternative medicine. By all means choose it if you want, but don’t expect the state to subsidise it. With the public finances in such a state, there are other priorities.
God, this is boring.
Get this through your head: it is NOT subsidised. Those who use it are actually subsidising the state. It's exactly the other way round.
Of course, you're very intelligent and you know this. You just feel obliged to support and advocate Labour's policy on this as an ex-parliamentary candidate.
Even you will be secretly embarrassed by it, even if you don't admit it on here.
Private education cannot be a priority at the moment. There are more important things.
That's just a Labour spin line!
The priority should be more investment in state education. This won't deliver it and will make its problems worse, whilst removing good schools and diversify of provision in many areas.
It would be a far more honest Labour policy to, say, pledge to increase the budget by £20bn a year and argue for income tax rises to pay for it. Mine would be to cut public spending elsewhere on welfare and pensioner benefits but that's not your angle.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
Private schools aren't businesses and most typically operate on very tight margins where they just about break even.
Where do the think the extra 20% is coming from if not from the school's reserves or the patents? Thin air?
Same old Labour.
They couldn't run a whelk stall. They have no ides about business.
At least they don’t want to f*** business, however.
Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.
The cultural/values stuff is properly a bigger barrier than the microeconomics these days, to be honest, but to some extent there's an overlap between the two - and it's a polarising one.
Business needs to navigate this better, as do politicians.
Outside of the Brexit controversies? That’s like saying that outside of the mass slaughter, Genghis Khan was a nice fella. Brexit is the Conservatives’ defining economic policy. It’s still where they run to at the drop of a hat.
What did the Tories say? “F*ck business “, yes that was it.
you fuck one sheep.....
You get arrested.
Not in Wales.
Speed dating in Wales.
Whatever turns ewe on.
They can badly hurt themselves running like that. 😠
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
That frustrating moment when you realise the Opposition are just as clueless as the government about education.
There are many private schools that will not notice. Eton. Harrow. Roedean. Clifton. Cheltenham.
There are others that will certainly have to raise fees and may well go bust.
Almost all in poorer areas. Round here, Denstone may just about survive, but the rest won't.
Now that may be what is intended. And it's a legitimate debate to have although I think they're going about it the wrong way (you want to eliminate private schools? Cut class sizes in the state sector by a big number).
But if you take this blind approach to it then you won't prepare for the influx of pupils to a state sector already creaking at the seams. And that will cause far more problems for education than the existence of private schools did.
Exactly, Labour's policy won't hit the grand public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and Charterhouse and Westminster where the parents are mainly multi millionaires and the foreign super rich.
What it will hit is smaller private schools which survive on a tight budget and whose parents are small business owners, police officers, teachers themselves etc who scrimp and save and avoid foreign holidays and new cars to pay the fees
Like my daughter's school - which has sent out a letter to all parents about the threat and it's concerns on the impact on the school, to manage expectations.
It's a downright idiotic policy, typical of Starmer's tactical triangulation rather than proper leadership, and means Labour are a clear and present danger to my family.
Private education is like alternative medicine. By all means choose it if you want, but don’t expect the state to subsidise it. With the public finances in such a state, there are other priorities.
God, this is boring.
Get this through your head: it is NOT subsidised. Those who use it are actually subsidising the state. It's exactly the other way round.
Of course, you're very intelligent and you know this. You just feel obliged to support and advocate Labour's policy on this as an ex-parliamentary candidate.
Even you will be secretly embarrassed by it, even if you don't admit it on here.
These idiots are always happy to cut off their noses to spite their faces. Where do the clowns think all the students whose parents cannot afford any more it going to go , DOH. So the filthy rich are not inconvenienced but normal people get even crappier education because these clowns have no extra money to pay for it.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
Private schools aren't businesses and most typically operate on very tight margins where they just about break even.
Where do the think the extra 20% is coming from if not from the school's reserves or the patents? Thin air?
Same old Labour.
They couldn't run a whelk stall. They have no ides about business.
At least they don’t want to f*** business, however.
Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.
The cultural/values stuff is properly a bigger barrier than the microeconomics these days, to be honest, but to some extent there's an overlap between the two - and it's a polarising one.
Business needs to navigate this better, as do politicians.
Outside of the Brexit controversies? That’s like saying that outside of the mass slaughter, Genghis Khan was a nice fella. Brexit is the Conservatives’ defining economic policy. It’s still where they run to at the drop of a hat.
What did the Tories say? “F*ck business “, yes that was it.
I'm not sure this doesn't help rather than harm Haley ?
DeSantis allies go to war with an unlikely foe: Nikki Haley https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/28/desantis-nikki-haley-2024-election-00094496 ...DeSantis is comfortably in second place in most surveys, trailing Trump but well ahead of the other Republicans in the field. But in recent weeks, he has lost ground, with Trump picking up endorsements from several Republican Congress members in Florida and with some major donors expressing reservations about the Florida governor. Two recent polls of South Carolina GOP voters showed Trump far ahead of the pack and Haley only narrowly behind DeSantis. A survey conducted earlier this month by National Public Affairs, a Republican firm co-founded by Clark, found DeSantis at 21 percent, with Haley at 19 percent. A Winthrop University poll taken several weeks earlier showed similar results, with DeSantis at 20 percent and Haley at 18 percent...
Haley seems like a much more plausible candidate to take on Trump than DeSantis. She has a proper contrast with Trump because she looks young and different, but also she negotiated the Trump era quite cannily and she can still appeal to people who liked Trump but think it's time for a change.
Also her state is primary #3, which is a good position to be in: The non-Trump field will probably need Iowa and NH to consolidate since there's one Trump and many non-Trumps, so it's going to be hard for any challenger to score a win over Trump until then.
Haley has about as much chance of winning the GOP nomination next year as Jeremy Hunt does of being the next Conservative leader. She also doesn't have the appeal to evangelicals in Iowa Pence does if you want a non Trump non De Santis candidate
Evangelicals in Iowa don't seem like a great place to fish for anti-Trump voters?
Iowa evangelicals voted for Cruz not Trump in 2016
Perhaps. But Netflix do have a 'documentary' featuring a black Cleopatra.
I'm aware quite a few cultural depictions, in drama, art and documentary form, of a very northern European looking Jesus. No one on the right gets all het up about those. Funny that.
Seem to remember seeing a viral clip of some Fox news presenter being outraged at Jesus NOT being portrayed as white.
(Of course, Santa Claus is based on St Nicholas, who was Greek, from what is now Turkey, so probably a bit too dusky for your average Fox News presenter.)
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
That frustrating moment when you realise the Opposition are just as clueless as the government about education.
There are many private schools that will not notice. Eton. Harrow. Roedean. Clifton. Cheltenham.
There are others that will certainly have to raise fees and may well go bust.
Almost all in poorer areas. Round here, Denstone may just about survive, but the rest won't.
Now that may be what is intended. And it's a legitimate debate to have although I think they're going about it the wrong way (you want to eliminate private schools? Cut class sizes in the state sector by a big number).
But if you take this blind approach to it then you won't prepare for the influx of pupils to a state sector already creaking at the seams. And that will cause far more problems for education than the existence of private schools did.
Exactly, Labour's policy won't hit the grand public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and Charterhouse and Westminster where the parents are mainly multi millionaires and the foreign super rich.
What it will hit is smaller private schools which survive on a tight budget and whose parents are small business owners, police officers, teachers themselves etc who scrimp and save and avoid foreign holidays and new cars to pay the fees
Like my daughter's school - which has sent out a letter to all parents about the threat and it's concerns on the impact on the school, to manage expectations.
It's a downright idiotic policy, typical of Starmer's tactical triangulation rather than proper leadership, and means Labour are a clear and present danger to my family.
Private education is like alternative medicine. By all means choose it if you want, but don’t expect the state to subsidise it. With the public finances in such a state, there are other priorities.
God, this is boring.
Get this through your head: it is NOT subsidised. Those who use it are actually subsidising the state. It's exactly the other way round.
Of course, you're very intelligent and you know this. You just feel obliged to support and advocate Labour's policy on this as an ex-parliamentary candidate.
Even you will be secretly embarrassed by it, even if you don't admit it on here.
No it’s fine. Private education cannot be a priority at the moment. There are more important things.
Personally I’m befuddled that anyone would choose private education over a good state education, but that’s up to you.
Lots of people choose it. It's not an irrational choice, as parents believe they are giving their children a head start over the majority of other children - which parent wouldn't want that if they could afford it? .
The idea is highly questionable when you look closely. You can buy something different, but better I would question especially when you consider the opportunity cost.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
That frustrating moment when you realise the Opposition are just as clueless as the government about education.
There are many private schools that will not notice. Eton. Harrow. Roedean. Clifton. Cheltenham.
There are others that will certainly have to raise fees and may well go bust.
Almost all in poorer areas. Round here, Denstone may just about survive, but the rest won't.
Now that may be what is intended. And it's a legitimate debate to have although I think they're going about it the wrong way (you want to eliminate private schools? Cut class sizes in the state sector by a big number).
But if you take this blind approach to it then you won't prepare for the influx of pupils to a state sector already creaking at the seams. And that will cause far more problems for education than the existence of private schools did.
Exactly, Labour's policy won't hit the grand public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and Charterhouse and Westminster where the parents are mainly multi millionaires and the foreign super rich.
What it will hit is smaller private schools which survive on a tight budget and whose parents are small business owners, police officers, teachers themselves etc who scrimp and save and avoid foreign holidays and new cars to pay the fees
Like my daughter's school - which has sent out a letter to all parents about the threat and it's concerns on the impact on the school, to manage expectations.
It's a downright idiotic policy, typical of Starmer's tactical triangulation rather than proper leadership, and means Labour are a clear and present danger to my family.
Private education is like alternative medicine. By all means choose it if you want, but don’t expect the state to subsidise it. With the public finances in such a state, there are other priorities.
God, this is boring.
Get this through your head: it is NOT subsidised. Those who use it are actually subsidising the state. It's exactly the other way round.
Of course, you're very intelligent and you know this. You just feel obliged to support and advocate Labour's policy on this as an ex-parliamentary candidate.
Even you will be secretly embarrassed by it, even if you don't admit it on here.
Private education cannot be a priority at the moment. There are more important things.
That's just a Labour spin line!
The priority should be more investment in state education. This won't deliver it and will make its problems worse, whilst removing good schools and diversify of provision in many areas.
It would be a far more honest Labour policy to, say, pledge to increase the budget by £20bn a year and argue for income tax rises to pay for it. Mine would be to cut public spending elsewhere on welfare and pensioner benefits but that's not your angle.
Honestly, you're better than this
You’re focusing on yourself and not the bigger picture.
Mr. Royale, quite. I, for one, was shocked that Will Smith's wife was not faithful. To history.
It’s a real slap in the face for those who want realistic historical depictions.
It’s ironic because the best available evidence is that darker skinned Egyptians had been oppressed for centuries by lighter skinned horribly inbred Macedonians…..you’d have thought there might be an angle in there somewhere…..
I'm not sure this doesn't help rather than harm Haley ?
DeSantis allies go to war with an unlikely foe: Nikki Haley https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/28/desantis-nikki-haley-2024-election-00094496 ...DeSantis is comfortably in second place in most surveys, trailing Trump but well ahead of the other Republicans in the field. But in recent weeks, he has lost ground, with Trump picking up endorsements from several Republican Congress members in Florida and with some major donors expressing reservations about the Florida governor. Two recent polls of South Carolina GOP voters showed Trump far ahead of the pack and Haley only narrowly behind DeSantis. A survey conducted earlier this month by National Public Affairs, a Republican firm co-founded by Clark, found DeSantis at 21 percent, with Haley at 19 percent. A Winthrop University poll taken several weeks earlier showed similar results, with DeSantis at 20 percent and Haley at 18 percent...
Haley seems like a much more plausible candidate to take on Trump than DeSantis. She has a proper contrast with Trump because she looks young and different, but also she negotiated the Trump era quite cannily and she can still appeal to people who liked Trump but think it's time for a change.
Also her state is primary #3, which is a good position to be in: The non-Trump field will probably need Iowa and NH to consolidate since there's one Trump and many non-Trumps, so it's going to be hard for any challenger to score a win over Trump until then.
Haley has about as much chance of winning the GOP nomination next year as Jeremy Hunt does of being the next Conservative leader. She also doesn't have the appeal to evangelicals in Iowa Pence does if you want a non Trump non De Santis candidate
Evangelicals in Iowa don't seem like a great place to fish for anti-Trump voters?
Iowa evangelicals voted for Cruz not Trump in 2016
Right but Trump wasn't President Trump at that point, he was the presenter of Celebrity Apprentice. And even there Cruz only got 28%, while Huckabee and Santorum totally bombed.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
Private schools aren't businesses and most typically operate on very tight margins where they just about break even.
Where do the think the extra 20% is coming from if not from the school's reserves or the patents? Thin air?
Same old Labour.
They couldn't run a whelk stall. They have no ides about business.
At least they don’t want to f*** business, however.
Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.
The cultural/values stuff is properly a bigger barrier than the microeconomics these days, to be honest, but to some extent there's an overlap between the two - and it's a polarising one.
Business needs to navigate this better, as do politicians.
“Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.”
Whaaaaaaaaaaat are you trying to say 🥹
That’s like invading Martians blowing up congress, and the president trying to spin at least half your government is still there functioning okay delivering the policies you voted for.
I think the real question is: what are you trying to say?
No.
“Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.”
The real question is, what are you trying to say 😆
“Aside from the murders, what a fine doctor Shipman was! Done wonders for my Bert’s lumbago.”
Besides, even then it's more complicated than that.
Would a Party Of Business make it almost impossible for Cambridge tech firms by giving in to Nimbies at every opportunity?
Increasingly, the Conservatives are the party of the retired (and remember, that's only happened in the last decade.) People who have made their pile, want to protect it, and see no reason why anyone else should be helped to make theirs.
Lady Thatcher was about aspiration for all, and that meant all those working class households. Sunak’s Tories are the party of protecting privilege.
That’s why, raised by Conservatives to be a conservative, each day I more clearly see why it’s important not to vote Conservative right now. Not me abandoning the party of Cameron and Lady Thatcher, but that Party has abandoned me.
Leaving aside all questions of fairness and impact on the state system, because honestly people are only pretending to give a fuck about those issues, this school bollocks isn't terrible politics from SKS.
He has to give the membership and activists some policy red meat, sorry, policy venison. This is a revenue positive way of doing that.
We are at the beginning of the end of one such phenomenon. I think the cultural left peaked in 2020. Listen to the derisive connotation of the word “woke” now. Look at newspapers, once all-in on this stuff, edge back a bit.
Search “Learn to love ambiguity” if you’re not a subscriber
Several intelligent people on the Left have made this journey, Matthew Syed, Trevor Phillips and now Janan Ganesh.
There will be others.
'Several intelligent people on the Left have made this journey'? You make it sound like the rest of us have yet to see the light.
The truth is that most (the vast majority) on the left have never bought into the more ridiculous examples of 'cultural left' dogma (e.g. 'sanitising' Roald Dahl books) any more than most on the right don't buy in to the more ridiculous examples of 'cultural right' dogma (e.g. banning Michelangelo's David).
But it suits us both, left and right, to highlight the idiocies of the others side's extemists.
I think this is an example of Margaret Thatcher's maxim that whenever you challenge a consensus you will be fought viciously and opposed every step of the way, until the change occurs, following which it becomes embedded and exactly the same people say it was inevitable and would have happened anyway.
It requires intellectual self-confidence to go against the consensus of your peers. The difference is Janan is leading the way. Others are following in its wake.
You don't have it.
Do you?
Yep.
Then I look forward to you demonstrating intellectual self-confidence and going against the consensus of your Tory peers.
Maybe supporting VAT on school fees?
No, that would make me as intellectually limited as you seem to be.
I have supported going against the interests of the Tory base and spending more on state education, science and defence and taxing capital more and workers less. And building more houses. I also support more bilateral and collaborative deals with the EU. I accept inclusion to be fair to individuals and build a common patriotic identity in Britain, but I don't support identity politics.
As for all my views I stand ready to revise them and recalibrate based upon the evidence of what would be best for the country and improve our quality of life.
I think you'll find most of "the Tory base" (whatever that is) is supportive of spending money on defence and a "common patriotic identity" (whatever that is).
As for "building more houses", let's nuance that by saying Conservatives support increased levels of home ownership because home owners tend to be more inclined to vote Conservative. That's not to say we shouldn't build more houses but housing isn't just about owner-occupation, I'd argue an active and well-regulated rental market and sector is an equally important part of the housing equation (whatever that is).
As for your last sentence, well, it's better than relying on focus groups and blindly supporting whatever opinion is held by the largest minority or majority in any poll or survey (whatever that is).
Fans of Family Guy may be entertained by the Freisler of Guantanamo Bay having a press secretary called Bryan Griffin. He sounds like the MAGA version of the pompous, self important, woke Brian.
‘Love God, Limit Government’
De Santis clearly making links with the right of the Conservative Party. Only really Farage still backs Trump in the UK though
Yep, it’s notable that the freedom-loving Tory right this week embraced both De Santis and Meloni when they made visits here. The National Conservative movement also seems to be gaining a lot of ground, with its interesting views about freedom and democracy. The next Tory leadership contest will be fascinating.
Focus on your own team's flaws and you might be in a better position to criticise others. I don't know how much of an overlap there is between De Santis/Meloni and the Tory leadership but do the right really define themselves in terms of freedom anyway or just freer than the left?
I'm not sure this doesn't help rather than harm Haley ?
DeSantis allies go to war with an unlikely foe: Nikki Haley https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/28/desantis-nikki-haley-2024-election-00094496 ...DeSantis is comfortably in second place in most surveys, trailing Trump but well ahead of the other Republicans in the field. But in recent weeks, he has lost ground, with Trump picking up endorsements from several Republican Congress members in Florida and with some major donors expressing reservations about the Florida governor. Two recent polls of South Carolina GOP voters showed Trump far ahead of the pack and Haley only narrowly behind DeSantis. A survey conducted earlier this month by National Public Affairs, a Republican firm co-founded by Clark, found DeSantis at 21 percent, with Haley at 19 percent. A Winthrop University poll taken several weeks earlier showed similar results, with DeSantis at 20 percent and Haley at 18 percent...
Haley seems like a much more plausible candidate to take on Trump than DeSantis. She has a proper contrast with Trump because she looks young and different, but also she negotiated the Trump era quite cannily and she can still appeal to people who liked Trump but think it's time for a change.
Also her state is primary #3, which is a good position to be in: The non-Trump field will probably need Iowa and NH to consolidate since there's one Trump and many non-Trumps, so it's going to be hard for any challenger to score a win over Trump until then.
Haley has about as much chance of winning the GOP nomination next year as Jeremy Hunt does of being the next Conservative leader. She also doesn't have the appeal to evangelicals in Iowa Pence does if you want a non Trump non De Santis candidate
Evangelicals in Iowa don't seem like a great place to fish for anti-Trump voters?
Iowa evangelicals voted for Cruz not Trump in 2016
Right but Trump wasn't President Trump at that point, he was the presenter of Celebrity Apprentice. And even there Cruz only got 28%, while Huckabee and Santorum totally bombed.
Trump isn't President at this point either and is in court
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
Private schools aren't businesses and most typically operate on very tight margins where they just about break even.
Where do the think the extra 20% is coming from if not from the school's reserves or the patents? Thin air?
Same old Labour.
They couldn't run a whelk stall. They have no ides about business.
At least they don’t want to f*** business, however.
Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.
The cultural/values stuff is properly a bigger barrier than the microeconomics these days, to be honest, but to some extent there's an overlap between the two - and it's a polarising one.
Business needs to navigate this better, as do politicians.
“Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.”
Whaaaaaaaaaaat are you trying to say 🥹
That’s like invading Martians blowing up congress, and the president trying to spin at least half your government is still there functioning okay delivering the policies you voted for.
I think the real question is: what are you trying to say?
No.
“Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.”
The real question is, what are you trying to say 😆
“Aside from the murders, what a fine doctor Shipman was! Done wonders for my Bert’s lumbago.”
Besides, even then it's more complicated than that.
Would a Party Of Business make it almost impossible for Cambridge tech firms by giving in to Nimbies at every opportunity?
Increasingly, the Conservatives are the party of the retired (and remember, that's only happened in the last decade.) People who have made their pile, want to protect it, and see no reason why anyone else should be helped to make theirs.
Lady Thatcher was about aspiration for all, and that meant all those working class households. Sunak’s Tories are the party of protecting privilege.
That’s why, raised by Conservatives to be a conservative, each day I more clearly see why it’s important not to vote Conservative right now. Not me abandoning the party of Cameron and Lady Thatcher, but that Party has abandoned me.
Or, as another great slogan put it,
What does the Conservative Party offer a working class kid from Brixton? They made him Prime Minister.
Leaving aside all questions of fairness and impact on the state system, because honestly people are only pretending to give a fuck about those issues, this school bollocks isn't terrible politics from SKS.
He has to give the membership and activists some policy red meat, sorry, policy venison. This is a revenue positive way of doing that.
Revenue positive yes. But dealing with a substantial increase in state school numbers would be a challenge too.
I guess we should just be pleased we’re not yet at the burning stage.
So does the activist Left, and no platforms as well.
One feeds off the other. So why feed the fire by taking sides?
You’re right. We shouldn’t feed the fire by taking sides. And that’s why Kemi Badenoch took the principled position of not meeting DeSantis… oh, hold on… what’s that? She *did* meet him?
It seems to me that there is a good chance that Trump or DeSantis is going to win in 2024. They aren't 'beyond the pale' characters, they both have democratic legitimacy.
Leaving aside all questions of fairness and impact on the state system, because honestly people are only pretending to give a fuck about those issues, this school bollocks isn't terrible politics from SKS.
He has to give the membership and activists some policy red meat, sorry, policy venison. This is a revenue positive way of doing that.
It's not revenue positive though. The money they raise will have to be spent out on state education for those forced out of the private sector. It's a rare all-costs-no-benefits policy. It is idiotic almost beyond belief, except that we've seen this belief from Labour before that taxes on people we don't like can be raised without them changing their behaviours as a result.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
That frustrating moment when you realise the Opposition are just as clueless as the government about education.
There are many private schools that will not notice. Eton. Harrow. Roedean. Clifton. Cheltenham.
There are others that will certainly have to raise fees and may well go bust.
Almost all in poorer areas. Round here, Denstone may just about survive, but the rest won't.
Now that may be what is intended. And it's a legitimate debate to have although I think they're going about it the wrong way (you want to eliminate private schools? Cut class sizes in the state sector by a big number).
But if you take this blind approach to it then you won't prepare for the influx of pupils to a state sector already creaking at the seams. And that will cause far more problems for education than the existence of private schools did.
Exactly, Labour's policy won't hit the grand public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and Charterhouse and Westminster where the parents are mainly multi millionaires and the foreign super rich.
What it will hit is smaller private schools which survive on a tight budget and whose parents are small business owners, police officers, teachers themselves etc who scrimp and save and avoid foreign holidays and new cars to pay the fees
Like my daughter's school - which has sent out a letter to all parents about the threat and it's concerns on the impact on the school, to manage expectations.
It's a downright idiotic policy, typical of Starmer's tactical triangulation rather than proper leadership, and means Labour are a clear and present danger to my family.
Private education is like alternative medicine. By all means choose it if you want, but don’t expect the state to subsidise it. With the public finances in such a state, there are other priorities.
God, this is boring.
Get this through your head: it is NOT subsidised. Those who use it are actually subsidising the state. It's exactly the other way round.
Of course, you're very intelligent and you know this. You just feel obliged to support and advocate Labour's policy on this as an ex-parliamentary candidate.
Even you will be secretly embarrassed by it, even if you don't admit it on here.
No it’s fine. Private education cannot be a priority at the moment. There are more important things.
Personally I’m befuddled that anyone would choose private education over a good state education, but that’s up to you.
Lots of people choose it. It's not an irrational choice, as parents believe they are giving their children a head start over the majority of other children - which parent wouldn't want that if they could afford it? .
The idea is highly questionable when you look closely. You can buy something different, but better I would question especially when you consider the opportunity cost.
Well it depends on what the alternative is, and also on the value of the contacts made. Having connections who are rich, or lawyers, or employers or senior professionals in all kinds of areas is a serious advantage in life for multiple reasons. Most privately educated people have those connections from a young age.
What private education often fails to give people is a sense of how privileged they are.
I'm not sure this doesn't help rather than harm Haley ?
DeSantis allies go to war with an unlikely foe: Nikki Haley https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/28/desantis-nikki-haley-2024-election-00094496 ...DeSantis is comfortably in second place in most surveys, trailing Trump but well ahead of the other Republicans in the field. But in recent weeks, he has lost ground, with Trump picking up endorsements from several Republican Congress members in Florida and with some major donors expressing reservations about the Florida governor. Two recent polls of South Carolina GOP voters showed Trump far ahead of the pack and Haley only narrowly behind DeSantis. A survey conducted earlier this month by National Public Affairs, a Republican firm co-founded by Clark, found DeSantis at 21 percent, with Haley at 19 percent. A Winthrop University poll taken several weeks earlier showed similar results, with DeSantis at 20 percent and Haley at 18 percent...
Haley seems like a much more plausible candidate to take on Trump than DeSantis. She has a proper contrast with Trump because she looks young and different, but also she negotiated the Trump era quite cannily and she can still appeal to people who liked Trump but think it's time for a change.
Also her state is primary #3, which is a good position to be in: The non-Trump field will probably need Iowa and NH to consolidate since there's one Trump and many non-Trumps, so it's going to be hard for any challenger to score a win over Trump until then.
Haley has about as much chance of winning the GOP nomination next year as Jeremy Hunt does of being the next Conservative leader. She also doesn't have the appeal to evangelicals in Iowa Pence does if you want a non Trump non De Santis candidate
Evangelicals in Iowa don't seem like a great place to fish for anti-Trump voters?
Iowa evangelicals voted for Cruz not Trump in 2016
Right but Trump wasn't President Trump at that point, he was the presenter of Celebrity Apprentice. And even there Cruz only got 28%, while Huckabee and Santorum totally bombed.
Trump isn't President at this point either and is in court
He's called President Trump, Americans are weird. I don't think GOP Iowa evangelicals are going to care about the court cases.
Mr. Royale, quite. I, for one, was shocked that Will Smith's wife was not faithful. To history.
It’s a real slap in the face for those who want realistic historical depictions.
It’s ironic because the best available evidence is that darker skinned Egyptians had been oppressed for centuries by lighter skinned horribly inbred Macedonians…..you’d have thought there might be an angle in there somewhere…..
It was just a crap joke about the Will/Jada Smith v Chris Rock slapping incident.
I personally prefer accurate representation where possible in films based on real events and don’t care if it’s something such as Lord of the Rings where people can be whatever colour etc because it’s made up fantasy.
As long as those who, say, demand a black cleopatra, won’t lose their shit when Daniel Craig is cast as Bob Marley then it’s fine. Films and tv are a commercially driven art form and so if people like a Black Henry VIII then that’s fine and if they don’t then people will think twice next time.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
That frustrating moment when you realise the Opposition are just as clueless as the government about education.
There are many private schools that will not notice. Eton. Harrow. Roedean. Clifton. Cheltenham.
There are others that will certainly have to raise fees and may well go bust.
Almost all in poorer areas. Round here, Denstone may just about survive, but the rest won't.
Now that may be what is intended. And it's a legitimate debate to have although I think they're going about it the wrong way (you want to eliminate private schools? Cut class sizes in the state sector by a big number).
But if you take this blind approach to it then you won't prepare for the influx of pupils to a state sector already creaking at the seams. And that will cause far more problems for education than the existence of private schools did.
Exactly, Labour's policy won't hit the grand public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and Charterhouse and Westminster where the parents are mainly multi millionaires and the foreign super rich.
What it will hit is smaller private schools which survive on a tight budget and whose parents are small business owners, police officers, teachers themselves etc who scrimp and save and avoid foreign holidays and new cars to pay the fees
Like my daughter's school - which has sent out a letter to all parents about the threat and it's concerns on the impact on the school, to manage expectations.
It's a downright idiotic policy, typical of Starmer's tactical triangulation rather than proper leadership, and means Labour are a clear and present danger to my family.
Private education is like alternative medicine. By all means choose it if you want, but don’t expect the state to subsidise it. With the public finances in such a state, there are other priorities.
God, this is boring.
Get this through your head: it is NOT subsidised. Those who use it are actually subsidising the state. It's exactly the other way round.
Of course, you're very intelligent and you know this. You just feel obliged to support and advocate Labour's policy on this as an ex-parliamentary candidate.
Even you will be secretly embarrassed by it, even if you don't admit it on here.
Private education cannot be a priority at the moment. There are more important things.
That's just a Labour spin line!
The priority should be more investment in state education. This won't deliver it and will make its problems worse, whilst removing good schools and diversify of provision in many areas.
It would be a far more honest Labour policy to, say, pledge to increase the budget by £20bn a year and argue for income tax rises to pay for it. Mine would be to cut public spending elsewhere on welfare and pensioner benefits but that's not your angle.
Honestly, you're better than this
You’re focusing on yourself and not the bigger picture.
But I'm a state sector parent, and, focusing on myself, I oppose it too.
Leaving aside all questions of fairness and impact on the state system, because honestly people are only pretending to give a fuck about those issues, this school bollocks isn't terrible politics from SKS.
He has to give the membership and activists some policy red meat, sorry, policy venison. This is a revenue positive way of doing that.
It's not revenue positive though. The money they raise will have to be spent out on state education for those forced out of the private sector. It's a rare all-costs-no-benefits policy. It is idiotic almost beyond belief, except that we've seen this belief from Labour before that taxes on people we don't like can be raised without them changing their behaviours as a result.
How many middle class tosspots are going to take their kids out of school and send them to Scumbag Comp if fees go up 20%? Anybody who says they know are guessing.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
Private schools aren't businesses and most typically operate on very tight margins where they just about break even.
Where do the think the extra 20% is coming from if not from the school's reserves or the patents? Thin air?
Same old Labour.
They couldn't run a whelk stall. They have no ides about business.
At least they don’t want to f*** business, however.
Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.
The cultural/values stuff is properly a bigger barrier than the microeconomics these days, to be honest, but to some extent there's an overlap between the two - and it's a polarising one.
Business needs to navigate this better, as do politicians.
Outside of the Brexit controversies? That’s like saying that outside of the mass slaughter, Genghis Khan was a nice fella. Brexit is the Conservatives’ defining economic policy. It’s still where they run to at the drop of a hat.
What did the Tories say? “F*ck business “, yes that was it.
Leaving aside all questions of fairness and impact on the state system, because honestly people are only pretending to give a fuck about those issues, this school bollocks isn't terrible politics from SKS.
He has to give the membership and activists some policy red meat, sorry, policy venison. This is a revenue positive way of doing that.
It's not revenue positive though. The money they raise will have to be spent out on state education for those forced out of the private sector. It's a rare all-costs-no-benefits policy. It is idiotic almost beyond belief, except that we've seen this belief from Labour before that taxes on people we don't like can be raised without them changing their behaviours as a result.
How many middle class tosspots are going to take their kids out of school and send them to Scumbag Comp if fees go up 20%? Anybody who says they know are guessing.
Well Labour appear to be guessing that that number will be zero. The majority of private schools expect not to survive. These are not money-making organisations, these are run at break-even levels. How many charity shops would stay open if they started having to pay tax?
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
That frustrating moment when you realise the Opposition are just as clueless as the government about education.
There are many private schools that will not notice. Eton. Harrow. Roedean. Clifton. Cheltenham.
There are others that will certainly have to raise fees and may well go bust.
Almost all in poorer areas. Round here, Denstone may just about survive, but the rest won't.
Now that may be what is intended. And it's a legitimate debate to have although I think they're going about it the wrong way (you want to eliminate private schools? Cut class sizes in the state sector by a big number).
But if you take this blind approach to it then you won't prepare for the influx of pupils to a state sector already creaking at the seams. And that will cause far more problems for education than the existence of private schools did.
Exactly, Labour's policy won't hit the grand public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and Charterhouse and Westminster where the parents are mainly multi millionaires and the foreign super rich.
What it will hit is smaller private schools which survive on a tight budget and whose parents are small business owners, police officers, teachers themselves etc who scrimp and save and avoid foreign holidays and new cars to pay the fees
Like my daughter's school - which has sent out a letter to all parents about the threat and it's concerns on the impact on the school, to manage expectations.
It's a downright idiotic policy, typical of Starmer's tactical triangulation rather than proper leadership, and means Labour are a clear and present danger to my family.
I've said before that Labours policies on private schools is unjust and a bad policy in many ways, but....
I have a dual national (EU) family which was never an issue when we were in the EU. I think Brexit it has cost my own family about £5k due to our circumstances, to secure for ourselves the same rights and freedoms that we had before by becoming dual nationals, and we were relatively fortunate. Others, not so much.
The fact is that this was never a big political issue because it affected so few people. I think it will be the same with labour and their punitive policies on private schools. It just won't affect enough people to be salient, and will appeal to a bigoted minority of voters. So it is just really a case of business as usual, sadly.
The difference here is that the Labour policy on taxing private schools is overwhelmingly popular with the public. Not a reason in itself to implement it (see executions):
Do Britons support or oppose Labour’s plan to remove the charitable status from private schools? (30 November)
Support 62% Neither 18% Oppose 13% Don't know 7%
Only 22% of 2019 Conservative voters OPPOSE Labour's plan.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
That frustrating moment when you realise the Opposition are just as clueless as the government about education.
There are many private schools that will not notice. Eton. Harrow. Roedean. Clifton. Cheltenham.
There are others that will certainly have to raise fees and may well go bust.
Almost all in poorer areas. Round here, Denstone may just about survive, but the rest won't.
Now that may be what is intended. And it's a legitimate debate to have although I think they're going about it the wrong way (you want to eliminate private schools? Cut class sizes in the state sector by a big number).
But if you take this blind approach to it then you won't prepare for the influx of pupils to a state sector already creaking at the seams. And that will cause far more problems for education than the existence of private schools did.
Exactly, Labour's policy won't hit the grand public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and Charterhouse and Westminster where the parents are mainly multi millionaires and the foreign super rich.
What it will hit is smaller private schools which survive on a tight budget and whose parents are small business owners, police officers, teachers themselves etc who scrimp and save and avoid foreign holidays and new cars to pay the fees
Like my daughter's school - which has sent out a letter to all parents about the threat and it's concerns on the impact on the school, to manage expectations.
It's a downright idiotic policy, typical of Starmer's tactical triangulation rather than proper leadership, and means Labour are a clear and present danger to my family.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
That frustrating moment when you realise the Opposition are just as clueless as the government about education.
There are many private schools that will not notice. Eton. Harrow. Roedean. Clifton. Cheltenham.
There are others that will certainly have to raise fees and may well go bust.
Almost all in poorer areas. Round here, Denstone may just about survive, but the rest won't.
Now that may be what is intended. And it's a legitimate debate to have although I think they're going about it the wrong way (you want to eliminate private schools? Cut class sizes in the state sector by a big number).
But if you take this blind approach to it then you won't prepare for the influx of pupils to a state sector already creaking at the seams. And that will cause far more problems for education than the existence of private schools did.
Exactly, Labour's policy won't hit the grand public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and Charterhouse and Westminster where the parents are mainly multi millionaires and the foreign super rich.
What it will hit is smaller private schools which survive on a tight budget and whose parents are small business owners, police officers, teachers themselves etc who scrimp and save and avoid foreign holidays and new cars to pay the fees
Like my daughter's school - which has sent out a letter to all parents about the threat and it's concerns on the impact on the school, to manage expectations.
It's a downright idiotic policy, typical of Starmer's tactical triangulation rather than proper leadership, and means Labour are a clear and present danger to my family.
I've said before that Labours policies on private schools is unjust and a bad policy in many ways, but....
I have a dual national (EU) family which was never an issue when we were in the EU. I think Brexit it has cost my own family about £5k due to our circumstances, to secure for ourselves the same rights and freedoms that we had before by becoming dual nationals, and we were relatively fortunate. Others, not so much.
The fact is that this was never a big political issue because it affected so few people. I think it will be the same with labour and their punitive policies on private schools. It just won't affect enough people to be salient, and will appeal to a bigoted minority of voters. So it is just really a case of business as usual, sadly.
The difference here is that the Labour policy on taxing private schools is overwhelmingly popular with the public. Not a reason in itself to implement it (see executions):
Do Britons support or oppose Labour’s plan to remove the charitable status from private schools? (30 November)
Support 62% Neither 18% Oppose 13% Don't know 7%
Only 22% of 2019 Conservative voters OPPOSE Labour's plan.
Leaving aside all questions of fairness and impact on the state system, because honestly people are only pretending to give a fuck about those issues, this school bollocks isn't terrible politics from SKS.
He has to give the membership and activists some policy red meat, sorry, policy venison. This is a revenue positive way of doing that.
It's not revenue positive though. The money they raise will have to be spent out on state education for those forced out of the private sector. It's a rare all-costs-no-benefits policy. It is idiotic almost beyond belief, except that we've seen this belief from Labour before that taxes on people we don't like can be raised without them changing their behaviours as a result.
How many middle class tosspots are going to take their kids out of school and send them to Scumbag Comp if fees go up 20%? Anybody who says they know are guessing.
Well Labour appear to be guessing that that number will be zero. The majority of private schools expect not to survive. These are not money-making organisations, these are run at break-even levels. How many charity shops would stay open if they started having to pay tax?
People would still go to charity shops if they charged VAT.
We should be spending more on state education. I could not agree more. One way of doing that would be to move private schools that cannot cope with losing VAT exemptions into the state sector.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
That frustrating moment when you realise the Opposition are just as clueless as the government about education.
There are many private schools that will not notice. Eton. Harrow. Roedean. Clifton. Cheltenham.
There are others that will certainly have to raise fees and may well go bust.
Almost all in poorer areas. Round here, Denstone may just about survive, but the rest won't.
Now that may be what is intended. And it's a legitimate debate to have although I think they're going about it the wrong way (you want to eliminate private schools? Cut class sizes in the state sector by a big number).
But if you take this blind approach to it then you won't prepare for the influx of pupils to a state sector already creaking at the seams. And that will cause far more problems for education than the existence of private schools did.
Exactly, Labour's policy won't hit the grand public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and Charterhouse and Westminster where the parents are mainly multi millionaires and the foreign super rich.
What it will hit is smaller private schools which survive on a tight budget and whose parents are small business owners, police officers, teachers themselves etc who scrimp and save and avoid foreign holidays and new cars to pay the fees
Like my daughter's school - which has sent out a letter to all parents about the threat and it's concerns on the impact on the school, to manage expectations.
It's a downright idiotic policy, typical of Starmer's tactical triangulation rather than proper leadership, and means Labour are a clear and present danger to my family.
I've said before that Labours policies on private schools is unjust and a bad policy in many ways, but....
I have a dual national (EU) family which was never an issue when we were in the EU. I think Brexit it has cost my own family about £5k due to our circumstances, to secure for ourselves the same rights and freedoms that we had before by becoming dual nationals, and we were relatively fortunate. Others, not so much.
The fact is that this was never a big political issue because it affected so few people. I think it will be the same with labour and their punitive policies on private schools. It just won't affect enough people to be salient, and will appeal to a bigoted minority of voters. So it is just really a case of business as usual, sadly.
The difference here is that the Labour policy on taxing private schools is overwhelmingly popular with the public. Not a reason in itself to implement it (see executions):
Do Britons support or oppose Labour’s plan to remove the charitable status from private schools? (30 November)
Support 62% Neither 18% Oppose 13% Don't know 7%
Only 22% of 2019 Conservative voters OPPOSE Labour's plan.
The question used here was a bit leading, but is backed up by this poll specifically on the tax question. This one has a an extra option that might be a clue for supporters of charitable status. It might get some backing if private schools were more charitable.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
That frustrating moment when you realise the Opposition are just as clueless as the government about education.
There are many private schools that will not notice. Eton. Harrow. Roedean. Clifton. Cheltenham.
There are others that will certainly have to raise fees and may well go bust.
Almost all in poorer areas. Round here, Denstone may just about survive, but the rest won't.
Now that may be what is intended. And it's a legitimate debate to have although I think they're going about it the wrong way (you want to eliminate private schools? Cut class sizes in the state sector by a big number).
But if you take this blind approach to it then you won't prepare for the influx of pupils to a state sector already creaking at the seams. And that will cause far more problems for education than the existence of private schools did.
Exactly, Labour's policy won't hit the grand public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and Charterhouse and Westminster where the parents are mainly multi millionaires and the foreign super rich.
What it will hit is smaller private schools which survive on a tight budget and whose parents are small business owners, police officers, teachers themselves etc who scrimp and save and avoid foreign holidays and new cars to pay the fees
Like my daughter's school - which has sent out a letter to all parents about the threat and it's concerns on the impact on the school, to manage expectations.
It's a downright idiotic policy, typical of Starmer's tactical triangulation rather than proper leadership, and means Labour are a clear and present danger to my family.
I've said before that Labours policies on private schools is unjust and a bad policy in many ways, but....
I have a dual national (EU) family which was never an issue when we were in the EU. I think Brexit it has cost my own family about £5k due to our circumstances, to secure for ourselves the same rights and freedoms that we had before by becoming dual nationals, and we were relatively fortunate. Others, not so much.
The fact is that this was never a big political issue because it affected so few people. I think it will be the same with labour and their punitive policies on private schools. It just won't affect enough people to be salient, and will appeal to a bigoted minority of voters. So it is just really a case of business as usual, sadly.
The difference here is that the Labour policy on taxing private schools is overwhelmingly popular with the public. Not a reason in itself to implement it (see executions):
Do Britons support or oppose Labour’s plan to remove the charitable status from private schools? (30 November)
Support 62% Neither 18% Oppose 13% Don't know 7%
Only 22% of 2019 Conservative voters OPPOSE Labour's plan.
Well duh. Most people don’t go to private schools and see them as a luxury for the rich.
Many people do have kids at state schools though and know just how few places there are, and don't relish a sudden influx of new kids. I think that polling is typical of the answers you get to a "haven't thought about it in much detail" question.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
That frustrating moment when you realise the Opposition are just as clueless as the government about education.
There are many private schools that will not notice. Eton. Harrow. Roedean. Clifton. Cheltenham.
There are others that will certainly have to raise fees and may well go bust.
Almost all in poorer areas. Round here, Denstone may just about survive, but the rest won't.
Now that may be what is intended. And it's a legitimate debate to have although I think they're going about it the wrong way (you want to eliminate private schools? Cut class sizes in the state sector by a big number).
But if you take this blind approach to it then you won't prepare for the influx of pupils to a state sector already creaking at the seams. And that will cause far more problems for education than the existence of private schools did.
Exactly, Labour's policy won't hit the grand public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and Charterhouse and Westminster where the parents are mainly multi millionaires and the foreign super rich.
What it will hit is smaller private schools which survive on a tight budget and whose parents are small business owners, police officers, teachers themselves etc who scrimp and save and avoid foreign holidays and new cars to pay the fees
Like my daughter's school - which has sent out a letter to all parents about the threat and it's concerns on the impact on the school, to manage expectations.
It's a downright idiotic policy, typical of Starmer's tactical triangulation rather than proper leadership, and means Labour are a clear and present danger to my family.
Private education is like alternative medicine. By all means choose it if you want, but don’t expect the state to subsidise it. With the public finances in such a state, there are other priorities.
God, this is boring.
Get this through your head: it is NOT subsidised. Those who use it are actually subsidising the state. It's exactly the other way round.
Of course, you're very intelligent and you know this. You just feel obliged to support and advocate Labour's policy on this as an ex-parliamentary candidate.
Even you will be secretly embarrassed by it, even if you don't admit it on here.
Private education cannot be a priority at the moment. There are more important things.
That's just a Labour spin line!
The priority should be more investment in state education. This won't deliver it and will make its problems worse, whilst removing good schools and diversify of provision in many areas.
It would be a far more honest Labour policy to, say, pledge to increase the budget by £20bn a year and argue for income tax rises to pay for it. Mine would be to cut public spending elsewhere on welfare and pensioner benefits but that's not your angle.
Honestly, you're better than this
You’re focusing on yourself and not the bigger picture.
But I'm a state sector parent, and, focusing on myself, I oppose it too.
As do 13% of people. That seems over represented on PB
You and Casino were never going to vote Labour anyway were you?
I finally have a Labour Policy I support but will never vote Labour under SKS anyway
Personally, I feel that public schools should be asked to take care of a lot more kids from the care system, to justify their charitable status. Not because I am against their current status, but because I think it would be a good idea. The care system is vastly expensive, and all it results in is that the looked after kids in turn have kids they can't cope with, who also go through the care system. Better to send them to Eton and Benenden for lacrosse and midnight feasts and they can one day be PM.
We should be spending more on state education. I could not agree more. One way of doing that would be to move private schools that cannot cope with losing VAT exemptions into the state sector.
Which happened locally when the local Private school gave up and transformed itself into an academy.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
Private schools aren't businesses and most typically operate on very tight margins where they just about break even.
Where do the think the extra 20% is coming from if not from the school's reserves or the patents? Thin air?
Same old Labour.
They couldn't run a whelk stall. They have no ides about business.
At least they don’t want to f*** business, however.
Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.
The cultural/values stuff is properly a bigger barrier than the microeconomics these days, to be honest, but to some extent there's an overlap between the two - and it's a polarising one.
Business needs to navigate this better, as do politicians.
“Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.”
Whaaaaaaaaaaat are you trying to say 🥹
That’s like invading Martians blowing up congress, and the president trying to spin at least half your government is still there functioning okay delivering the policies you voted for.
I think the real question is: what are you trying to say?
No.
“Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.”
The real question is, what are you trying to say 😆
“Aside from the murders, what a fine doctor Shipman was! Done wonders for my Bert’s lumbago.”
Besides, even then it's more complicated than that.
Would a Party Of Business make it almost impossible for Cambridge tech firms by giving in to Nimbies at every opportunity?
Increasingly, the Conservatives are the party of the retired (and remember, that's only happened in the last decade.) People who have made their pile, want to protect it, and see no reason why anyone else should be helped to make theirs.
Lady Thatcher was about aspiration for all, and that meant all those working class households. Sunak’s Tories are the party of protecting privilege.
That’s why, raised by Conservatives to be a conservative, each day I more clearly see why it’s important not to vote Conservative right now. Not me abandoning the party of Cameron and Lady Thatcher, but that Party has abandoned me.
An irony being that for northern working class kids who want to leave school at 16 and get a job / apprenticeship / learn a trade there's probably never been a better time.
If they work hard, keep out of trouble and have a bit of luck they'll be buying their first home before they're 25.
Many middle class southern kids will need to inherit big style, possibly multiple times, merely to maintain the lifestyle their parents had.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
That frustrating moment when you realise the Opposition are just as clueless as the government about education.
There are many private schools that will not notice. Eton. Harrow. Roedean. Clifton. Cheltenham.
There are others that will certainly have to raise fees and may well go bust.
Almost all in poorer areas. Round here, Denstone may just about survive, but the rest won't.
Now that may be what is intended. And it's a legitimate debate to have although I think they're going about it the wrong way (you want to eliminate private schools? Cut class sizes in the state sector by a big number).
But if you take this blind approach to it then you won't prepare for the influx of pupils to a state sector already creaking at the seams. And that will cause far more problems for education than the existence of private schools did.
Exactly, Labour's policy won't hit the grand public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and Charterhouse and Westminster where the parents are mainly multi millionaires and the foreign super rich.
What it will hit is smaller private schools which survive on a tight budget and whose parents are small business owners, police officers, teachers themselves etc who scrimp and save and avoid foreign holidays and new cars to pay the fees
Like my daughter's school - which has sent out a letter to all parents about the threat and it's concerns on the impact on the school, to manage expectations.
It's a downright idiotic policy, typical of Starmer's tactical triangulation rather than proper leadership, and means Labour are a clear and present danger to my family.
I've said before that Labours policies on private schools is unjust and a bad policy in many ways, but....
I have a dual national (EU) family which was never an issue when we were in the EU. I think Brexit it has cost my own family about £5k due to our circumstances, to secure for ourselves the same rights and freedoms that we had before by becoming dual nationals, and we were relatively fortunate. Others, not so much.
The fact is that this was never a big political issue because it affected so few people. I think it will be the same with labour and their punitive policies on private schools. It just won't affect enough people to be salient, and will appeal to a bigoted minority of voters. So it is just really a case of business as usual, sadly.
The difference here is that the Labour policy on taxing private schools is overwhelmingly popular with the public. Not a reason in itself to implement it (see executions):
Do Britons support or oppose Labour’s plan to remove the charitable status from private schools? (30 November)
Support 62% Neither 18% Oppose 13% Don't know 7%
Only 22% of 2019 Conservative voters OPPOSE Labour's plan.
Well duh. Most people don’t go to private schools and see them as a luxury for the rich.
Many people do have kids at state schools though and know just how few places there are, and don't relish a sudden influx of new kids. I think that polling is typical of the answers you get to a "haven't thought about it in much detail" question.
We all know that most people will cough up the extra 20%, or go to schools that don’t raise the fees 20%. We’re talking about a free market here.
At the end of the day it clearly isn’t charitable. You’re exchanging money for a service for your own child.
We should be spending more on state education. I could not agree more. One way of doing that would be to move private schools that cannot cope with losing VAT exemptions into the state sector.
Thereby getting the state to pay for the education of kids who were previously educated privately? It doesn't strike me as an obvious win.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
That frustrating moment when you realise the Opposition are just as clueless as the government about education.
There are many private schools that will not notice. Eton. Harrow. Roedean. Clifton. Cheltenham.
There are others that will certainly have to raise fees and may well go bust.
Almost all in poorer areas. Round here, Denstone may just about survive, but the rest won't.
Now that may be what is intended. And it's a legitimate debate to have although I think they're going about it the wrong way (you want to eliminate private schools? Cut class sizes in the state sector by a big number).
But if you take this blind approach to it then you won't prepare for the influx of pupils to a state sector already creaking at the seams. And that will cause far more problems for education than the existence of private schools did.
Exactly, Labour's policy won't hit the grand public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and Charterhouse and Westminster where the parents are mainly multi millionaires and the foreign super rich.
What it will hit is smaller private schools which survive on a tight budget and whose parents are small business owners, police officers, teachers themselves etc who scrimp and save and avoid foreign holidays and new cars to pay the fees
Like my daughter's school - which has sent out a letter to all parents about the threat and it's concerns on the impact on the school, to manage expectations.
It's a downright idiotic policy, typical of Starmer's tactical triangulation rather than proper leadership, and means Labour are a clear and present danger to my family.
I've said before that Labours policies on private schools is unjust and a bad policy in many ways, but....
I have a dual national (EU) family which was never an issue when we were in the EU. I think Brexit it has cost my own family about £5k due to our circumstances, to secure for ourselves the same rights and freedoms that we had before by becoming dual nationals, and we were relatively fortunate. Others, not so much.
The fact is that this was never a big political issue because it affected so few people. I think it will be the same with labour and their punitive policies on private schools. It just won't affect enough people to be salient, and will appeal to a bigoted minority of voters. So it is just really a case of business as usual, sadly.
The difference here is that the Labour policy on taxing private schools is overwhelmingly popular with the public. Not a reason in itself to implement it (see executions):
Do Britons support or oppose Labour’s plan to remove the charitable status from private schools? (30 November)
Support 62% Neither 18% Oppose 13% Don't know 7%
Only 22% of 2019 Conservative voters OPPOSE Labour's plan.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
Private schools aren't businesses and most typically operate on very tight margins where they just about break even.
Where do the think the extra 20% is coming from if not from the school's reserves or the patents? Thin air?
Same old Labour.
They couldn't run a whelk stall. They have no ides about business.
At least they don’t want to f*** business, however.
Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.
The cultural/values stuff is properly a bigger barrier than the microeconomics these days, to be honest, but to some extent there's an overlap between the two - and it's a polarising one.
Business needs to navigate this better, as do politicians.
Outside of the Brexit controversies? That’s like saying that outside of the mass slaughter, Genghis Khan was a nice fella. Brexit is the Conservatives’ defining economic policy. It’s still where they run to at the drop of a hat.
It's like poking a hornet's nest with Brexit, isn't it, and just makes people mad?
It's purely a process of political independence from the European Union. Once that is put aside everything on tax, regulation, labour reforms and trade missions is entirely up for discussion.
There is nothing anti-business in any of that, but it does have a political boundary with respect to the EU.
That's it.
There you go again with that conservative impulse to impose your order on everyone else.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
That frustrating moment when you realise the Opposition are just as clueless as the government about education.
There are many private schools that will not notice. Eton. Harrow. Roedean. Clifton. Cheltenham.
There are others that will certainly have to raise fees and may well go bust.
Almost all in poorer areas. Round here, Denstone may just about survive, but the rest won't.
Now that may be what is intended. And it's a legitimate debate to have although I think they're going about it the wrong way (you want to eliminate private schools? Cut class sizes in the state sector by a big number).
But if you take this blind approach to it then you won't prepare for the influx of pupils to a state sector already creaking at the seams. And that will cause far more problems for education than the existence of private schools did.
Exactly, Labour's policy won't hit the grand public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and Charterhouse and Westminster where the parents are mainly multi millionaires and the foreign super rich.
What it will hit is smaller private schools which survive on a tight budget and whose parents are small business owners, police officers, teachers themselves etc who scrimp and save and avoid foreign holidays and new cars to pay the fees
Like my daughter's school - which has sent out a letter to all parents about the threat and it's concerns on the impact on the school, to manage expectations.
It's a downright idiotic policy, typical of Starmer's tactical triangulation rather than proper leadership, and means Labour are a clear and present danger to my family.
I've said before that Labours policies on private schools is unjust and a bad policy in many ways, but....
I have a dual national (EU) family which was never an issue when we were in the EU. I think Brexit it has cost my own family about £5k due to our circumstances, to secure for ourselves the same rights and freedoms that we had before by becoming dual nationals, and we were relatively fortunate. Others, not so much.
The fact is that this was never a big political issue because it affected so few people. I think it will be the same with labour and their punitive policies on private schools. It just won't affect enough people to be salient, and will appeal to a bigoted minority of voters. So it is just really a case of business as usual, sadly.
The difference here is that the Labour policy on taxing private schools is overwhelmingly popular with the public. Not a reason in itself to implement it (see executions):
Do Britons support or oppose Labour’s plan to remove the charitable status from private schools? (30 November)
Support 62% Neither 18% Oppose 13% Don't know 7%
Only 22% of 2019 Conservative voters OPPOSE Labour's plan.
Removing charitable status is a slightly different question to charging VAT!
You undeniably have an issue where VAT is paid on a service that the government would provide free of charge. All depends on exactly how many people make the switch.
But what exactly is Labour's plan? Do they want fewer kids educated in the private sector? They could get tied in knots on this one.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
That frustrating moment when you realise the Opposition are just as clueless as the government about education.
There are many private schools that will not notice. Eton. Harrow. Roedean. Clifton. Cheltenham.
There are others that will certainly have to raise fees and may well go bust.
Almost all in poorer areas. Round here, Denstone may just about survive, but the rest won't.
Now that may be what is intended. And it's a legitimate debate to have although I think they're going about it the wrong way (you want to eliminate private schools? Cut class sizes in the state sector by a big number).
But if you take this blind approach to it then you won't prepare for the influx of pupils to a state sector already creaking at the seams. And that will cause far more problems for education than the existence of private schools did.
Exactly, Labour's policy won't hit the grand public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and Charterhouse and Westminster where the parents are mainly multi millionaires and the foreign super rich.
What it will hit is smaller private schools which survive on a tight budget and whose parents are small business owners, police officers, teachers themselves etc who scrimp and save and avoid foreign holidays and new cars to pay the fees
Like my daughter's school - which has sent out a letter to all parents about the threat and it's concerns on the impact on the school, to manage expectations.
It's a downright idiotic policy, typical of Starmer's tactical triangulation rather than proper leadership, and means Labour are a clear and present danger to my family.
I've said before that Labours policies on private schools is unjust and a bad policy in many ways, but....
I have a dual national (EU) family which was never an issue when we were in the EU. I think Brexit it has cost my own family about £5k due to our circumstances, to secure for ourselves the same rights and freedoms that we had before by becoming dual nationals, and we were relatively fortunate. Others, not so much.
The fact is that this was never a big political issue because it affected so few people. I think it will be the same with labour and their punitive policies on private schools. It just won't affect enough people to be salient, and will appeal to a bigoted minority of voters. So it is just really a case of business as usual, sadly.
The difference here is that the Labour policy on taxing private schools is overwhelmingly popular with the public. Not a reason in itself to implement it (see executions):
Do Britons support or oppose Labour’s plan to remove the charitable status from private schools? (30 November)
Support 62% Neither 18% Oppose 13% Don't know 7%
Only 22% of 2019 Conservative voters OPPOSE Labour's plan.
We should be spending more on state education. I could not agree more. One way of doing that would be to move private schools that cannot cope with losing VAT exemptions into the state sector.
Thereby getting the state to pay for the education of kids who were previously educated privately? It doesn't strike me as an obvious win.
The win is the school, its teaching staff and its facilities. They become available to many more people. If the school closes, the kids will move into the state sector anyway.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
Private schools aren't businesses and most typically operate on very tight margins where they just about break even.
Where do the think the extra 20% is coming from if not from the school's reserves or the patents? Thin air?
Same old Labour.
They couldn't run a whelk stall. They have no ides about business.
At least they don’t want to f*** business, however.
Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.
The cultural/values stuff is properly a bigger barrier than the microeconomics these days, to be honest, but to some extent there's an overlap between the two - and it's a polarising one.
Business needs to navigate this better, as do politicians.
Outside of the Brexit controversies? That’s like saying that outside of the mass slaughter, Genghis Khan was a nice fella. Brexit is the Conservatives’ defining economic policy. It’s still where they run to at the drop of a hat.
It's like poking a hornet's nest with Brexit, isn't it, and just makes people mad?
It's purely a process of political independence from the European Union. Once that is put aside everything on tax, regulation, labour reforms and trade missions is entirely up for discussion.
There is nothing anti-business in any of that, but it does have a political boundary with respect to the EU.
That's it.
There you go again with that conservative impulse to impose your order on everyone else.
If it’s order, why does it feel so much like chaos 🤷♀️
I guess we should just be pleased we’re not yet at the burning stage.
Have you read that article? It appears to be the state of Florida saying certain books aren't appropriate in state schools. It's hardly outlawing them. And it's only happening because the cultural left is pushing books in schools which the vast majority of parents would prefer them not to.
Here’s a list of books banned in one Florida county: https://pen.org/these-books-are-banned-in-martin-county-florida/ Lots of Jodi Picoult and Toni Morrison. What exactly about these books are so dangerous? Is Nobel laureate Toni Morrison what you mean by books pushed by the cultural left?
Having them on the shelves is “pushing books”. Banning Nobel laureates is just reasonable parental preference.
Private schools will not have to raise their fees to cover Labour’s VAT raid on independent education, the shadow education secretary has insisted, describing claims that the policy would result in widespread school closures as “bogus”.
Bridget Phillipson told The Times that private schools would be “more than able” to cover the cost of paying VAT without raising the cost to parents or being forced to close.
She further pledged that the £1.7 billion raised by imposing the tax would be invested in recruiting and retaining teachers particularly in Stem subjects where state schools had struggled to attract specialist graduates.
The party released figures showing that about half of all computer science lessons at state schools were being taught by staff who had no A-level or degree-level qualification in the subject.
At the same time more than one in four physics lessons were taught by non-specialists while one in ten maths teachers had no appropriate senior qualification.
That frustrating moment when you realise the Opposition are just as clueless as the government about education.
There are many private schools that will not notice. Eton. Harrow. Roedean. Clifton. Cheltenham.
There are others that will certainly have to raise fees and may well go bust.
Almost all in poorer areas. Round here, Denstone may just about survive, but the rest won't.
Now that may be what is intended. And it's a legitimate debate to have although I think they're going about it the wrong way (you want to eliminate private schools? Cut class sizes in the state sector by a big number).
But if you take this blind approach to it then you won't prepare for the influx of pupils to a state sector already creaking at the seams. And that will cause far more problems for education than the existence of private schools did.
Exactly, Labour's policy won't hit the grand public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and Charterhouse and Westminster where the parents are mainly multi millionaires and the foreign super rich.
What it will hit is smaller private schools which survive on a tight budget and whose parents are small business owners, police officers, teachers themselves etc who scrimp and save and avoid foreign holidays and new cars to pay the fees
Like my daughter's school - which has sent out a letter to all parents about the threat and it's concerns on the impact on the school, to manage expectations.
It's a downright idiotic policy, typical of Starmer's tactical triangulation rather than proper leadership, and means Labour are a clear and present danger to my family.
I've said before that Labours policies on private schools is unjust and a bad policy in many ways, but....
I have a dual national (EU) family which was never an issue when we were in the EU. I think Brexit it has cost my own family about £5k due to our circumstances, to secure for ourselves the same rights and freedoms that we had before by becoming dual nationals, and we were relatively fortunate. Others, not so much.
The fact is that this was never a big political issue because it affected so few people. I think it will be the same with labour and their punitive policies on private schools. It just won't affect enough people to be salient, and will appeal to a bigoted minority of voters. So it is just really a case of business as usual, sadly.
The difference here is that the Labour policy on taxing private schools is overwhelmingly popular with the public. Not a reason in itself to implement it (see executions):
Do Britons support or oppose Labour’s plan to remove the charitable status from private schools? (30 November)
Support 62% Neither 18% Oppose 13% Don't know 7%
Only 22% of 2019 Conservative voters OPPOSE Labour's plan.
I'd be surprised if hardly any of the 51% of 2019 Tory voters who support the policy switch because it gets implemented.
I would expect maybe a quarter of the 8% of 2019 Labour voters who disagree with the policy to switch their votes.
So guessing a net loss to Labour of between 1-2% from the policy despite the overwhelming public support as the motivation of those losing out from the change is much higher than those who benefit only slightly.
Personally, I feel that public schools should be asked to take care of a lot more kids from the care system, to justify their charitable status. Not because I am against their current status, but because I think it would be a good idea. The care system is vastly expensive, and all it results in is that the looked after kids in turn have kids they can't cope with, who also go through the care system. Better to send them to Eton and Benenden for lacrosse and midnight feasts and they can one day be PM.
Comments
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/22/books/book-ban-florida.html
I guess we should just be pleased we’re not yet at the burning stage.
Whaaaaaaaaaaat are you trying to say 🥹
That’s like invading Martians blowing up congress, and the president trying to spin at least half your government is still there functioning okay delivering the policies you voted for.
It’s all there in PBs undeleteable uneditable annals - I once suggested Ganesh is left wing and didn’t get away with it.
The Right's insecurity and paranoia about its own countries culture is something to behold.
The March Hare mad PB faithful have come out swinging this morning. Scant evidence to support their invective, but when does lack of evidence ever hold back a strident partisan opinion?
It's purely a process of political independence from the European Union. Once that is put aside everything on tax, regulation, labour reforms and trade missions is entirely up for discussion.
There is nothing anti-business in any of that, but it does have a political boundary with respect to the EU.
That's it.
One feeds off the other. So why feed the fire by taking sides?
Doesn't one of the Claudius books suggest that Christ was actually the by-blow of a Greek mercenary? A visual depiction of the result of this union obviously.
What I suspect all Labour supporters want is the same.
I have a dual national (EU) family which was never an issue when we were in the EU. I think Brexit it has cost my own family about £5k due to our circumstances, to secure for ourselves the same rights and freedoms that we had before by becoming dual nationals, and we were relatively fortunate. Others, not so much.
The fact is that this was never a big political issue because it affected so few people. I think it will be the same with labour and their punitive policies on private schools. It just won't affect enough people to be salient, and will appeal to a bigoted minority of voters. So it is just really a case of business as usual, sadly.
- The 2020 covid recession was deeper.
- The 1919–1926 depression was longer and deeper.
- The 1930-1931 Great Depression was longer.
- The 1980s recession was as long.
- The 1990s recession was as long.
Apart from those though, sure, 2008 was the biggest recession we've ever had (in the past 100 years).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recessions_in_the_United_Kingdom
Speed dating in Wales.
Get this through your head: it is NOT subsidised. Those who use it are actually subsidising the state. It's exactly the other way round.
Of course, you're very intelligent and you know this. You just feel obliged to support and advocate Labour's policy on this as an ex-parliamentary candidate.
Even you will be secretly embarrassed by it, even if you don't admit it on here.
Maybe supporting VAT on school fees?
“Outside of the Brexit controversies the Tories are very supportive of business.”
The real question is, what are you trying to say 😆
“Aside from the murders, what a fine doctor Shipman was! Done wonders for my Bert’s lumbago.”
Personally I’m befuddled that anyone would choose private education over a good state education, but that’s up to you.
Mr Divvie, prior to the Romans, the Seleucid Empire held Judea, so it would be entirely possible for a Greek mercenary to be the father of Jesus.
I have supported going against the interests of the Tory base and spending more on state education, science and defence and taxing capital more and workers less. And building more houses. I also support more bilateral and collaborative deals with the EU. I accept inclusion to be fair to individuals and build a common patriotic identity in Britain, but I don't support identity politics.
As for all my views I stand ready to revise them and recalibrate based upon the evidence of what would be best for the country and improve our quality of life.
Would a Party Of Business make it almost impossible for Cambridge tech firms by giving in to Nimbies at every opportunity?
Increasingly, the Conservatives are the party of the retired (and remember, that's only happened in the last decade.) People who have made their pile, want to protect it, and see no reason why anyone else should be helped to make theirs.
Unfortunately it seems very clear to me that the widespread existence of private schools is very bad for society.
Secondary schools in Trafford are already full. My oldest two, fortunately, have places, but my youngest is only 8. If Labour introduce this before she gets to 11 then demand for state education here is going to significantly exceed supply as you will no longer get the c. 7% going to private schools to ease the pressure.
Even if the intention is a schools building programme, it will be years before those places come on stream.
The priority should be more investment in state education. This won't deliver it and will make its problems worse, whilst removing good schools and diversify of provision in many areas.
It would be a far more honest Labour policy to, say, pledge to increase the budget by £20bn a year and argue for income tax rises to pay for it. Mine would be to cut public spending elsewhere on welfare and pensioner benefits but that's not your angle.
Honestly, you're better than this
Enjoy the great British weather folks, and please do get out there in the sun.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/video/2013/dec/13/santa-white-jesus-white-fox-news-megyn-kelly-video
(Of course, Santa Claus is based on St Nicholas, who was Greek, from what is now Turkey, so probably a bit too dusky for your average Fox News presenter.)
That’s why, raised by Conservatives to be a conservative, each day I more clearly see why it’s important not to vote Conservative right now. Not me abandoning the party of Cameron and Lady Thatcher, but that Party has abandoned me.
He has to give the membership and activists some policy red meat, sorry, policy venison. This is a revenue positive way of doing that.
As for "building more houses", let's nuance that by saying Conservatives support increased levels of home ownership because home owners tend to be more inclined to vote Conservative. That's not to say we shouldn't build more houses but housing isn't just about owner-occupation, I'd argue an active and well-regulated rental market and sector is an equally important part of the housing equation (whatever that is).
As for your last sentence, well, it's better than relying on focus groups and blindly supporting whatever opinion is held by the largest minority or majority in any poll or survey (whatever that is).
What does the Conservative Party offer a working class kid from Brixton? They made him Prime Minister.
What private education often fails to give people is a sense of how privileged they are.
I personally prefer accurate representation where possible in films based on real events and don’t care if it’s something such as Lord of the Rings where people can be whatever colour etc because it’s made up fantasy.
As long as those who, say, demand a black cleopatra, won’t lose their shit when Daniel Craig is cast as Bob Marley then it’s fine. Films and tv are a commercially driven art form and so if people like a Black Henry VIII then that’s fine and if they don’t then people will think twice next time.
The majority of private schools expect not to survive. These are not money-making organisations, these are run at break-even levels. How many charity shops would stay open if they started having to pay tax?
Do Britons support or oppose Labour’s plan to remove the charitable status from private schools? (30 November)
Support 62%
Neither 18%
Oppose 13%
Don't know 7%
Only 22% of 2019 Conservative voters OPPOSE Labour's plan.
https://twitter.com/redfieldwilton/status/1599030811172519936
Is 68% for Labour good?
What would be a typical retention rate?
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/should-uk-private-schoold-be-exempt-from-tax
I think that polling is typical of the answers you get to a "haven't thought about it in much detail" question.
You and Casino were never going to vote Labour anyway were you?
I finally have a Labour Policy I support but will never vote Labour under SKS anyway
If they work hard, keep out of trouble and have a bit of luck they'll be buying their first home before they're 25.
Many middle class southern kids will need to inherit big style, possibly multiple times, merely to maintain the lifestyle their parents had.
Its quite a reversal from the Thatcher era.
At the end of the day it clearly isn’t charitable. You’re exchanging money for a service for your own child.
There's no VAT on university fees, for example. Should we remove their charitable status too?
My landlord isn't a charity. Let's put VAT on rent!
You undeniably have an issue where VAT is paid on a service that the government would provide free of charge. All depends on exactly how many people make the switch.
But what exactly is Labour's plan? Do they want fewer kids educated in the private sector? They could get tied in knots on this one.
Banning Nobel laureates is just reasonable parental preference.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1652214600580886531
I would expect maybe a quarter of the 8% of 2019 Labour voters who disagree with the policy to switch their votes.
So guessing a net loss to Labour of between 1-2% from the policy despite the overwhelming public support as the motivation of those losing out from the change is much higher than those who benefit only slightly.