politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Nighthawks is now open
If you’re Footloose, and fancy free tonight, why not relax, and converse into the night on the day’s events in PB NightHawks.
Comments
-
First!0
-
Excellent
Thanks TSE for compiling these, will allow me to waste even more of my benefactors time.0 -
Ugh, #7.. have they not heard of a log scale!0
-
@Itajai
FPT
''Many things get propped up as they can't stand on their own feet.'
You could add child benefit to your list,after all it's the decision of 'independent ' people to have children.
What other conclusions can you come to, when a policy that potentially closes down many excellent schools and costs the state an additional £ 4,350 per pupil is based on anything other than class hatred & envy?0 -
Re 9. UKIP don't hate the Tories, we pity them for not being what their label says they are.
For that matter UKIP don't hate anyone, although we despise socialists and fascists with equal vigour.0 -
So, from previous thread, c600k kids at private school, £6k saving per head on annual education costs, benefit to UK is £3.6bn a year.
Total value of business rate reduction to schools is £165m a year, or 27,500 kids pulled out of the schools due to cost increases resulting, or 4.6% reduction in kids at private schools.
Everytime Labour comes out with another of its stupid new policy ideas, you have to think none of them have a GCSE in maths0 -
Despise? You need to get a grip, they are people who have different beliefs and opinions to you. Not mortal enemies.MikeK said:Re 9. UKIP don't hate the Tories, we pity them for not being what their label says they are.
For that matter UKIP don't hate anyone, although we despise socialists and fascists with equal vigour.
0 -
As a sciencey kinda bloke, surely reading 16 counts as research for you?RobD said:Excellent
Thanks TSE for compiling these, will allow me to waste even more of my benefactors time.0 -
Saddosaddo said:So, from previous thread, c600k kids at private school, £6k saving per head on annual education costs, benefit to UK is £3.6bn a year.
Total value of business rate reduction to schools is £165m a year, or 27,500 kids pulled out of the schools due to cost increases resulting, or 4.6% reduction in kids at private schools.
Everytime Labour comes out with another of its stupid new policy ideas, you have to think none of them have a GCSE in maths
I am not sure you have correctly judged the price elasticity of private education.
Many parents sacrifice a lot for their kids to go to private school, many will be prepared to pay a little extra, so not many will pull out from private school.0 -
You ignore the socialists belief in the beneficial effects of spending more money from the magic money tree. Also by giving everyone the same cr*p education we will have a socialist nirvana just like communism had in eastern europe.....saddo said:So, from previous thread, c600k kids at private school, £6k saving per head on annual education costs, benefit to UK is £3.6bn a year.
Total value of business rate reduction to schools is £165m a year, or 27,500 kids pulled out of the schools due to cost increases resulting, or 4.6% reduction in kids at private schools.
Everytime Labour comes out with another of its stupid new policy ideas, you have to think none of them have a GCSE in maths
0 -
Except that your Nige is happy to plan a coalition/support with the main socialist party lead by Ed Miliband. Despise?MikeK said:Re 9. UKIP don't hate the Tories, we pity them for not being what their label says they are.
For that matter UKIP don't hate anyone, although we despise socialists and fascists with equal vigour.
0 -
He should team up with the guy who invented that giant trumpet so they could hear his farts in France. Perhaps their combined effort could lead to a device which we could use to counter the effects of any industrial fires sending deadly stench across the channel.TheScreamingEagles said:
As a sciencey kinda bloke, surely reading 16 counts as research for you?RobD said:Excellent
Thanks TSE for compiling these, will allow me to waste even more of my benefactors time.0 -
I am not sure you have correctly judged the price elasticity of private education.
Many parents sacrifice a lot for their kids to go to private school, many will be prepared to pay a little extra, so not many will pull out from private school.
I know from personal experience. If the price goes up, all our Marxist class war chums will do is hurt the poorest parents who sacrifice all kinds of things to get their kids into the best possible school. They really don't care about kids, parents or education, or they'd be focusing on how they get the state system up to the standards of the private schools.
0 -
With government spending already unsustainable, Labour Party policy on spending is to get businesses (eg energy cos and banks) and charities (eg private schools) to pay for their spending promises.
Since companies and charities don't get a vote, it might work in the short term - until people realise the consequences of such a policy.0 -
I am very amused that Pope Francis made his highly critical address of the EU at the Parliament in Strasbourg - one of the most visible examples of where the EU has gone wrong. Obsessed by history, unprepared to do things that need doing lest they annoy the French someone. An EU that was at least pretending to be serious would get rid of the Parliament in Strasbourg, but the present EU isn't even pretending.0
-
They should just be done with it and annex Brussels from Belgium and convert it into an EU capital territory.OblitusSumMe said:I am very amused that Pope Francis made his highly critical address of the EU at the Parliament in Strasbourg - one of the most visible examples of where the EU has gone wrong. Obsessed by history, unprepared to do things that need doing lest they annoy the French someone. An EU that was at least pretending to be serious would get rid of the Parliament in Strasbourg, but the present EU isn't even pretending.
0 -
So that's ok then. Squeeze them a bit more.David_Evershed said:
Saddosaddo said:So, from previous thread, c600k kids at private school, £6k saving per head on annual education costs, benefit to UK is £3.6bn a year.
Total value of business rate reduction to schools is £165m a year, or 27,500 kids pulled out of the schools due to cost increases resulting, or 4.6% reduction in kids at private schools.
Everytime Labour comes out with another of its stupid new policy ideas, you have to think none of them have a GCSE in maths
I am not sure you have correctly judged the price elasticity of private education.
Many parents sacrifice a lot for their kids to go to private school, many will be prepared to pay a little extra, so not many will pull out from private school.
So Labour can piss it up against the wall somewhere else. Again.0 -
On #8 it's the first chart that is really interesting to me. The number of oldies has risen a lot, but so has the "working-age*" population. I don't know how the comparison would look if you compared the 60s to now. There must be a timeseries for the proportion of the working age population somewhere...
Anyway, the point I was going to make is that it becomes easier to afford lots of old people when you factor in that we have many fewer young people - who are also expensive in terms of healthcare, education, etc. The other thing is that people under the age of 16-18 are expected to live with their parents, because we wouldn't expect them to be able to live on their own.
The same could be said of many old people, who end up being expensively housed in communal establishments, or supported in their isolation by expensive visits. I remember there was talk a few days ago about child benefit, etc, but I wonder whether it would make sense to create a tax break for income tax payers who have their elderly parents living with them.
* Granted it includes 14-18 year olds in that chart, but that's a mere minor detail.0 -
@NewJournal: Labour's Tristram Hunt told his plans for private schools are 'offensive bigotry' - by his old fee-paying school http://t.co/KtR2rwLJQK
0 -
FPT @MikeK @peter_the_punter
Bet confirmed.
You can have 17.5% if you want.
The difference would barely buy a swift half in London anyway :-(0 -
Can't say that Pope Francis' general description of Europe does not strike a chord.
9. No kidding. Hasn't it always been thus?
6. The occasional overexcited statement on revolution in that direction is understandable but can be irritating at times, but I can live with it, as it has made things more exciting.0 -
More squealing will only help Ed.Scott_P said:@NewJournal: Labour's Tristram Hunt told his plans for private schools are 'offensive bigotry' - by his old fee-paying school http://t.co/KtR2rwLJQK
0 -
This is pretty blunt, especially for the Guardian...
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/25/conspiracy-theories-secret-oil-fields-north-sea
Scratch the surface and it’s disturbing how common it is in Labour circles to believe that Britain’s newspaper editors gather in darkened rooms to plot the publication of Miliband’s many gaffes. Some, it seems, simply cannot accept that maybe their leader’s poor reputation is of his own making.
0 -
Maybe.bigjohnowls said:
More squealing will only help Ed.Scott_P said:@NewJournal: Labour's Tristram Hunt told his plans for private schools are 'offensive bigotry' - by his old fee-paying school http://t.co/KtR2rwLJQK
But what was notable to me from this morning's interview was that the Shadow Education Secretary had absolutely nothing to say about how he was going to improve state schools where over 90% of our children are educated. Nothing. That ought to worry every Labour supporter and every parent in the country.
0 -
I see Angelina Jolie is bullying Ed.
Alistair Heath describing Labour under Ed as anti capitalist class warriors
So, nothing new really
0 -
I don't understand the argument with private schools and tax. The vast majority are charitable institutions educating children at no cost to the state, not businesses enriching the pockets of loophole seeking shareholders. Plenty of them have been doing it for centuries, and grant all manner of scholarships and bursaries.
If Labour don't like them, and think they're socially divisive, they should have the courage of their convictions: commit to banning them in their manifesto. If they don't, or think that'd be counter-productive, they should instead focus on improving the quality state education instead, and drive the private schools out of business.
If this mood-music did become anything more than just grandstanding, all it would do is drive out of business the smaller private schools. It would leave larger public schools - those that charge much higher fees - with an even more commanding position in the market, taking in an ever greater proportion of their pupils from the international super-rich to compensate.
That would achieve nothing for British children, and win the respect of no-one.0 -
Good to see you back in fighting form, Mike, after your under the weatherness.MikeK said:Re 9. UKIP don't hate the Tories, we pity them for not being what their label says they are.
For that matter UKIP don't hate anyone, although we despise socialists and fascists with equal vigour.
Thanks for your pity - we are realists and ergo pragmatists. The only party that is not living in cloud-cuckoo land, including your own.
0 -
A ban would not be legally enforceable. Hence all the rest of the sniping.Casino_Royale said:I don't understand the argument with private schools and tax. The vast majority are charitable institutions educating children at no cost to the state, not businesses enriching the pockets of loophole seeking shareholders. Plenty of them have been doing it for centuries, and grant all manner of scholarships and bursaries.
If Labour don't like them, and think they're socially divisive, they should have the courage of their convictions: commit to banning them in their manifesto. If they don't, or think that'd be counter-productive, they should instead focus on improving the quality state education instead, and drive the private schools out of business.
If this mood-music did become anything more than just grandstanding, all it would do is drive out of business the smaller private schools. It would leave larger public schools - those that charge much higher fees - with an even more commanding position in the market, taking in an ever greater proportion of their pupils from the international super-rich to compensate.
That would achieve nothing for British children, and win the respect of no-one.
0 -
On 2 this has surely gone past sacking the SPAD. I think it is time to sack Theresa. Delusions of competence and now grandeur as well apparently.0
-
Private schools are part of the control system, whereby the high echelons teach some of the country's youth enough to be able to function as intermediate level servants, recruiting them into MI6/MI5, the church, the Army,Navy,RAF officer corps, and other positions where loyalty to the pyramid is always required, such as politics. High intelligence is not required, just blind loyalty. Think Owen Paterson, for example.
http://tapnewswire.com/2014/11/owen-paterson-versus-theresa-may-at-last-the-expected-tory-splits-over-fracking/0 -
And the criticism does not just come from independent schools - http://WWW.TElegraph.co.uk/education/educationopinion/11253061/Labours-plan-makes-state-schools-objects-of-reluctant-charity.htmlbigjohnowls said:
More squealing will only help Ed.Scott_P said:@NewJournal: Labour's Tristram Hunt told his plans for private schools are 'offensive bigotry' - by his old fee-paying school http://t.co/KtR2rwLJQK
0 -
I read no.2 on the spectator:
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/11/theresa-may-a-big-beast-in-kitten-heels/?preview=true
" ‘She doesn’t rate Cameron any more. She did, but not any more,’ confides a friend of the Home Secretary. ‘There was a time early on when she would want to please David, but slowly she has seen just how incompetent that operation is. How the PM will say he will do one thing, only to be drawn in another direction. She’s given up on him.’ "
The most weird thing considering her behavior lately (reckless not cautious) is this:
" But as the leadership speculation grows, so does the criticism. One phrase that never goes away is ‘risk averse’. ‘While some politicians fly by the seat of their pants, Theresa likes to have four parachutes next to the door,’ says a former staffer. Her supporters point out that this is just good practice, and planning is not the same as caution. She was nicknamed ‘Theresa May, or maybe not’, by detractors in opposition. "
0 -
Many will be unable, having already had to sacrifice so much.David_Evershed said:
Saddosaddo said:So, from previous thread, c600k kids at private school, £6k saving per head on annual education costs, benefit to UK is £3.6bn a year.
Total value of business rate reduction to schools is £165m a year, or 27,500 kids pulled out of the schools due to cost increases resulting, or 4.6% reduction in kids at private schools.
Everytime Labour comes out with another of its stupid new policy ideas, you have to think none of them have a GCSE in maths
I am not sure you have correctly judged the price elasticity of private education.
Many parents sacrifice a lot for their kids to go to private school, many will be prepared to pay a little extra, so not many will pull out from private school.
If they can afford "x", they can afford "x+y" is obvious nonsense. All you have to do is go around the loop a few times - set it up as an iteration. First time round you have x0 and then you set x1 equal to x0+y
Either you reach a point (xn) where it breaks down, or you reach infinity.
0 -
I confess I was chewing the steering wheel this morning about that idiot's proposals on private schools.
I pay tax on all my income. This pays for my kids' education at state schools.
But the local schools are terrible.
So I pay for private schooling out of my taxed income.
This saves the state about £12K a year from what it would otherwise cost them to educate my kids.
It costs me just over £20K a year. Or what in the public sector would be called pension contributions from the public purse.
Who is subsidising who here?
By paying for private education I am already subsidising the state system by far more than the modest tax breaks given to my kids' school.
But this is not enough. The amount I subsidise the state system for out of my taxed income is to be increased so that the staff and resources I pay for are to be used free of charge by the public sector to supposedly compensate for their ineptitude.
Because this is fair.
Apparently.0 -
A perfect example of Labour's poverty of ideas is that the only thing they could think of to do with the fines for forex fixing was bung it at the NHS. Is that really the best use of the money Ed Balls can come up with? Were there other options? Or did he simply default to Labour's fetish.Cyclefree said:But what was notable to me from this morning's interview was that the Shadow Education Secretary had absolutely nothing to say about how he was going to improve state schools where over 90% of our children are educated. Nothing. That ought to worry every Labour supporter and every parent in the country.
What a depressing shower our politicians are.
0 -
She'll need all four of them if she runs for Tory leader.Speedy said:I read no.2 on the spectator:
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/11/theresa-may-a-big-beast-in-kitten-heels/?preview=true
" ‘She doesn’t rate Cameron any more. She did, but not any more,’ confides a friend of the Home Secretary. ‘There was a time early on when she would want to please David, but slowly she has seen just how incompetent that operation is. How the PM will say he will do one thing, only to be drawn in another direction. She’s given up on him.’ "
The most weird thing considering her behavior lately (reckless not cautious) is this:
" But as the leadership speculation grows, so does the criticism. One phrase that never goes away is ‘risk averse’. ‘While some politicians fly by the seat of their pants, Theresa likes to have four parachutes next to the door,’ says a former staffer. Her supporters point out that this is just good practice, and planning is not the same as caution. She was nicknamed ‘Theresa May, or maybe not’, by detractors in opposition. "
Interesting she allegedly said this, "The PM (Cameron) will say he will do one thing, only to be drawn in another direction. She’s given up on him."
That confirms exactly what I said on here months ago.0 -
No I think that is Osborne the most popular politician in the UK, amazingly enough.Danny565 said:
Don't the polls often rate her as the most popular member of the government?DavidL said:On 2 this has surely gone past sacking the SPAD. I think it is time to sack Theresa. Delusions of competence and now grandeur as well apparently.
I obviously spend too much time with lawyers (occupational hazard) but I think it is fair to say that she is extremely unpopular amongst them.
0 -
They could nationalise the schools through compulsory purchase, the same as with any other enterprise. Legislation and regulation could then be put in place making it too poor a business proposition for any new ones to be set up.Cyclefree said:
A ban would not be legally enforceable. Hence all the rest of the sniping.Casino_Royale said:I don't understand the argument with private schools and tax. The vast majority are charitable institutions educating children at no cost to the state, not businesses enriching the pockets of loophole seeking shareholders. Plenty of them have been doing it for centuries, and grant all manner of scholarships and bursaries.
If Labour don't like them, and think they're socially divisive, they should have the courage of their convictions: commit to banning them in their manifesto. If they don't, or think that'd be counter-productive, they should instead focus on improving the quality state education instead, and drive the private schools out of business.
If this mood-music did become anything more than just grandstanding, all it would do is drive out of business the smaller private schools. It would leave larger public schools - those that charge much higher fees - with an even more commanding position in the market, taking in an ever greater proportion of their pupils from the international super-rich to compensate.
That would achieve nothing for British children, and win the respect of no-one.
Clement Atlee was lobbied to do it in the 1945 Labour government, as Andrew Marr points out in his excellent book 'A History of Modern Britain'. He didn't because he had too much respect for Haileybury, his old school.
Marr postulates in his book just how different post-war British history might have been had he done so, although I disagree with his conclusions.0 -
It's the same with the mansion tax. Popular as it undoubtedly is with those priced out of property in London, the money raised is not going to be used to build houses / flats for the young who are paying sky high rents, living at home or unable to buy their own homes. No - that too is going to the NHS.glw said:
A perfect example of Labour's poverty of ideas is that the only thing they could think of to do with the fines for forex fixing was bung it at the NHS. Is that really the best use of the money Ed Balls can come up with? Were there other options? Or did he simply default to Labour's fetish.Cyclefree said:But what was notable to me from this morning's interview was that the Shadow Education Secretary had absolutely nothing to say about how he was going to improve state schools where over 90% of our children are educated. Nothing. That ought to worry every Labour supporter and every parent in the country.
What a depressing shower our politicians are.
As if the only thing the state should spend money on is this.
It's pathetic. It's adolescent gesture politics.
0 -
Whereas Dave is planning tax cuts from the magic money tree?Cyclefree said:
It's the same with the mansion tax. Popular as it undoubtedly is with those priced out of property in London, the money raised is not going to be used to build houses / flats for the young who are paying sky high rents, living at home or unable to buy their own homes. No - that too is going to the NHS.glw said:
A perfect example of Labour's poverty of ideas is that the only thing they could think of to do with the fines for forex fixing was bung it at the NHS. Is that really the best use of the money Ed Balls can come up with? Were there other options? Or did he simply default to Labour's fetish.Cyclefree said:But what was notable to me from this morning's interview was that the Shadow Education Secretary had absolutely nothing to say about how he was going to improve state schools where over 90% of our children are educated. Nothing. That ought to worry every Labour supporter and every parent in the country.
What a depressing shower our politicians are.
As if the only thing the state should spend money on is this.
It's pathetic. It's adolescent gesture politics.
0 -
Even worse than all that was the implied contempt for state schools and their teachers. Poor things: according to Hunt they were unable to prepare their children for Oxbridge or teach them history and could only do it if the history teacher from St Cake's came down and showed them how.DavidL said:I confess I was chewing the steering wheel this morning about that idiot's proposals on private schools.
I pay tax on all my income. This pays for my kids' education at state schools.
But the local schools are terrible.
So I pay for private schooling out of my taxed income.
This saves the state about £12K a year from what it would otherwise cost them to educate my kids.
It costs me just over £20K a year. Or what in the public sector would be called pension contributions from the public purse.
Who is subsidising who here?
By paying for private education I am already subsidising the state system by far more than the modest tax breaks given to my kids' school.
But this is not enough. The amount I subsidise the state system for out of my taxed income is to be increased so that the staff and resources I pay for are to be used free of charge by the public sector to supposedly compensate for their ineptitude.
Because this is fair.
Apparently.
EdM does not have a blank sheet of paper. He is recycling the policies of the 1970's and, to be fair, he told us a while ago in response to someone on the campaign trail who asked him to bring back socialism that that was exactly what he was doing.
I could write a better Labour manifesto than him.
0 -
DavidL My old private school, Tonbridge, as well as providing bursaries and scholarships is a partner of a Medway Academy and teachers teach there on sabbatical and ex pupils on gap years, while Tonbridge also benefits from learning about some of the methods the Academy uses on bullying etc0
-
Tonights YG will surely see a Tory bouceback?0
-
Agree. That policy is from La-La-Land. It will have to be paid for. And Cameron has not said how.bigjohnowls said:
Whereas Dave is planning tax cuts from the magic money tree?Cyclefree said:
It's the same with the mansion tax. Popular as it undoubtedly is with those priced out of property in London, the money raised is not going to be used to build houses / flats for the young who are paying sky high rents, living at home or unable to buy their own homes. No - that too is going to the NHS.glw said:
A perfect example of Labour's poverty of ideas is that the only thing they could think of to do with the fines for forex fixing was bung it at the NHS. Is that really the best use of the money Ed Balls can come up with? Were there other options? Or did he simply default to Labour's fetish.Cyclefree said:But what was notable to me from this morning's interview was that the Shadow Education Secretary had absolutely nothing to say about how he was going to improve state schools where over 90% of our children are educated. Nothing. That ought to worry every Labour supporter and every parent in the country.
What a depressing shower our politicians are.
As if the only thing the state should spend money on is this.
It's pathetic. It's adolescent gesture politics.
But Labour can't really make that criticism since their whole spending policy is based on the magic money tree
0 -
One of my first acts as Directly Elected Dictator will be to abolish the department of education, and use the money saved to give to parents as vouchers on private schools.0
-
I agree that there is a lot of excellence in the state system even if there is not locally for me. I also agree that Hunt's attitude is astonishingly patronising. Someone who had the benefit of private education at UCS should know better and show more respect.Cyclefree said:
Even worse than all that was the implied contempt for state schools and their teachers. Poor things: according to Hunt they were unable to prepare their children for Oxbridge or teach them history and could only do it if the history teacher from St Cake's came down and showed them how.DavidL said:I confess I was chewing the steering wheel this morning about that idiot's proposals on private schools.
I pay tax on all my income. This pays for my kids' education at state schools.
But the local schools are terrible.
So I pay for private schooling out of my taxed income.
This saves the state about £12K a year from what it would otherwise cost them to educate my kids.
It costs me just over £20K a year. Or what in the public sector would be called pension contributions from the public purse.
Who is subsidising who here?
By paying for private education I am already subsidising the state system by far more than the modest tax breaks given to my kids' school.
But this is not enough. The amount I subsidise the state system for out of my taxed income is to be increased so that the staff and resources I pay for are to be used free of charge by the public sector to supposedly compensate for their ineptitude.
Because this is fair.
Apparently.
EdM does not have a blank sheet of paper. He is recycling the policies of the 1970's and, to be fair, he told us a while ago in response to someone on the campaign trail who asked him to bring back socialism that that was exactly what he was doing.
I could write a better Labour manifesto than him.
The huge problem we have in this country is the loss of the paths to success for those bright kids that were lost with Grammar schools. Grammar schools have lots of problems but we have yet to find an alternative route for those from poorer backgrounds. This is a real and substantial problem that is adversely affecting our economic future. But Hunt has nothing useful to say about it.0 -
The IFS say its fully funded and George will not let the OBR look despite numerous calls from Balls I thought.Cyclefree said:
Agree. That policy is from La-La-Land. It will have to be paid for. And Cameron has not said how.bigjohnowls said:
Whereas Dave is planning tax cuts from the magic money tree?Cyclefree said:
It's the same with the mansion tax. Popular as it undoubtedly is with those priced out of property in London, the money raised is not going to be used to build houses / flats for the young who are paying sky high rents, living at home or unable to buy their own homes. No - that too is going to the NHS.glw said:
A perfect example of Labour's poverty of ideas is that the only thing they could think of to do with the fines for forex fixing was bung it at the NHS. Is that really the best use of the money Ed Balls can come up with? Were there other options? Or did he simply default to Labour's fetish.Cyclefree said:But what was notable to me from this morning's interview was that the Shadow Education Secretary had absolutely nothing to say about how he was going to improve state schools where over 90% of our children are educated. Nothing. That ought to worry every Labour supporter and every parent in the country.
What a depressing shower our politicians are.
As if the only thing the state should spend money on is this.
It's pathetic. It's adolescent gesture politics.
But Labour can't really make that criticism since their whole spending policy is based on the magic money tree
Has an independent source said its not funded?
0 -
I think you'll find the ECHR (which did not exist in 1945) will have to say something about that. If, say, some parents wanted to give their children a Catholic education, I don't think the state could stop them doing so.Casino_Royale said:
They could nationalise the schools through compulsory purchase, the same as with any other enterprise. Legislation and regulation could then be put in place making it too poor a business proposition for any new ones to be set up.Cyclefree said:
A ban would not be legally enforceable. Hence all the rest of the sniping.Casino_Royale said:I don't understand the argument with private schools and tax. The vast majority are charitable institutions educating children at no cost to the state, not businesses enriching the pockets of loophole seeking shareholders. Plenty of them have been doing it for centuries, and grant all manner of scholarships and bursaries.
If Labour don't like them, and think they're socially divisive, they should have the courage of their convictions: commit to banning them in their manifesto. If they don't, or think that'd be counter-productive, they should instead focus on improving the quality state education instead, and drive the private schools out of business.
If this mood-music did become anything more than just grandstanding, all it would do is drive out of business the smaller private schools. It would leave larger public schools - those that charge much higher fees - with an even more commanding position in the market, taking in an ever greater proportion of their pupils from the international super-rich to compensate.
That would achieve nothing for British children, and win the respect of no-one.
Clement Atlee was lobbied to do it in the 1945 Labour government, as Andrew Marr points out in his excellent book 'A History of Modern Britain'. He didn't because he had too much respect for Haileybury, his old school.
Marr postulates in his book just how different post-war British history might have been had he done so, although I disagree with his conclusions.
Also independent schools are not businesses. Most of them are charities and charity law will have something to say about it. As far as I can recall, when a charity is wound up it has to give all the money it has back to the charitable givers,
Pace NickPalmer's comment yesterday: the fact that schools have charitable status is not some recent "eccentricity" (as he put it). Education has been a charitable activity since the time of Queen Elizabeth the First.
0 -
Not necessarily - only 24 more hours has passed since Rochester.bigjohnowls said:Tonights YG will surely see a Tory bouceback?
There should be some bounceback by the start of next week - but I wouldn't be at all sure of any before then.0 -
Been saying for years that bringing back grammar schools is hugely important, bright working class kids deserve the chance denied to them by the likes of Crosland, the truly disgusting Shirley Williams and every government for the last fifty years.DavidL said:
I agree that there is a lot of excellence in the state system even if there is not locally for me. I also agree that Hunt's attitude is astonishingly patronising. Someone who had the benefit of private education at UCS should know better and show more respect.Cyclefree said:
Even worse than all that was the implied contempt for state schools and their teachers. Poor things: according to Hunt they were unable to prepare their children for Oxbridge or teach them history and could only do it if the history teacher from St Cake's came down and showed them how.DavidL said:I confess I was chewing the steering wheel this morning about that idiot's proposals on private schools.
I pay tax on all my income. This pays for my kids' education at state schools.
But the local schools are terrible.
So I pay for private schooling out of my taxed income.
This saves the state about £12K a year from what it would otherwise cost them to educate my kids.
It costs me just over £20K a year. Or what in the public sector would be called pension contributions from the public purse.
Who is subsidising who here?
By paying for private education I am already subsidising the state system by far more than the modest tax breaks given to my kids' school.
But this is not enough. The amount I subsidise the state system for out of my taxed income is to be increased so that the staff and resources I pay for are to be used free of charge by the public sector to supposedly compensate for their ineptitude.
Because this is fair.
Apparently.
EdM does not have a blank sheet of paper. He is recycling the policies of the 1970's and, to be fair, he told us a while ago in response to someone on the campaign trail who asked him to bring back socialism that that was exactly what he was doing.
I could write a better Labour manifesto than him.
The huge problem we have in this country is the loss of the paths to success for those bright kids that were lost with Grammar schools. Grammar schools have lots of problems but we have yet to find an alternative route for those from poorer backgrounds. This is a real and substantial problem that is adversely affecting our economic future. But Hunt has nothing useful to say about it.
That and leaving the EU are my reasons for voting UKIP0 -
what about those kids failed by the mainstream system thrown a lifeline by a bursary from an independent school?bigjohnowls said:
More squealing will only help Ed.Scott_P said:@NewJournal: Labour's Tristram Hunt told his plans for private schools are 'offensive bigotry' - by his old fee-paying school http://t.co/KtR2rwLJQK
0 -
It's not "lest they annoy the French" (or anyone else), it's "because it would obviously be vetoed by the French". They have a veto on closing the Strasbourg parliament. What do you suggest the parliament and the rest of the member states do?OblitusSumMe said:I am very amused that Pope Francis made his highly critical address of the EU at the Parliament in Strasbourg - one of the most visible examples of where the EU has gone wrong. Obsessed by history, unprepared to do things that need doing lest they annoy the French someone. An EU that was at least pretending to be serious would get rid of the Parliament in Strasbourg, but the present EU isn't even pretending.
0 -
I've no idea whether it's funded. I thought that they would only do the cuts when the deficit had been eliminated i.e. on the 2nd of never.......bigjohnowls said:
The IFS say its fully funded and George will not let the OBR look despite numerous calls from Balls I thought.Cyclefree said:
Agree. That policy is from La-La-Land. It will have to be paid for. And Cameron has not said how.bigjohnowls said:
Whereas Dave is planning tax cuts from the magic money tree?Cyclefree said:
It's the same with the mansion tax. Popular as it undoubtedly is with those priced out of property in London, the money raised is not going to be used to build houses / flats for the young who are paying sky high rents, living at home or unable to buy their own homes. No - that too is going to the NHS.glw said:
A perfect example of Labour's poverty of ideas is that the only thing they could think of to do with the fines for forex fixing was bung it at the NHS. Is that really the best use of the money Ed Balls can come up with? Were there other options? Or did he simply default to Labour's fetish.Cyclefree said:But what was notable to me from this morning's interview was that the Shadow Education Secretary had absolutely nothing to say about how he was going to improve state schools where over 90% of our children are educated. Nothing. That ought to worry every Labour supporter and every parent in the country.
What a depressing shower our politicians are.
As if the only thing the state should spend money on is this.
It's pathetic. It's adolescent gesture politics.
But Labour can't really make that criticism since their whole spending policy is based on the magic money tree
Has an independent source said its not funded?
0 -
Praise for the Pope's speech today from Nigel Farage0
-
*ahem*Cyclefree said:
I think you'll find the ECHR (which did not exist in 1945) will have to say something about that. If, say, some parents wanted to give their children a Catholic education, I don't think the state could stop them doing so.Casino_Royale said:
They could nationalise the schools through compulsory purchase, the same as with any other enterprise. Legislation and regulation could then be put in place making it too poor a business proposition for any new ones to be set up.Cyclefree said:
A ban would not be legally enforceable. Hence all the rest of the sniping.Casino_Royale said:I don't understand the argument with private schools and tax. The vast majority are charitable institutions educating children at no cost to the state, not businesses enriching the pockets of loophole seeking shareholders. Plenty of them have been doing it for centuries, and grant all manner of scholarships and bursaries.
If Labour don't like them, and think they're socially divisive, they should have the courage of their convictions: commit to banning them in their manifesto. If they don't, or think that'd be counter-productive, they should instead focus on improving the quality state education instead, and drive the private schools out of business.
If this mood-music did become anything more than just grandstanding, all it would do is drive out of business the smaller private schools. It would leave larger public schools - those that charge much higher fees - with an even more commanding position in the market, taking in an ever greater proportion of their pupils from the international super-rich to compensate.
That would achieve nothing for British children, and win the respect of no-one.
Clement Atlee was lobbied to do it in the 1945 Labour government, as Andrew Marr points out in his excellent book 'A History of Modern Britain'. He didn't because he had too much respect for Haileybury, his old school.
Marr postulates in his book just how different post-war British history might have been had he done so, although I disagree with his conclusions.
Also independent schools are not businesses. Most of them are charities and charity law will have something to say about it. As far as I can recall, when a charity is wound up it has to give all the money it has back to the charitable givers,
Pace NickPalmer's comment yesterday: the fact that schools have charitable status is not some recent "eccentricity" (as he put it). Education has been a charitable activity since the time of Queen Elizabeth the First.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_VI_of_England
(see legacy)0 -
Co-operation and shared experiences are undoubtedly a good thing. My kid's school make their excellent sports facilities available to local children with talent that can benefit from them.HYUFD said:DavidL My old private school, Tonbridge, as well as providing bursaries and scholarships is a partner of a Medway Academy and teachers teach there on sabbatical and ex pupils on gap years, while Tonbridge also benefits from learning about some of the methods the Academy uses on bullying etc
But the argument that these schools are being subsidised instead of actually subsidising the state sector is completely false. And dishonest. And pathetic.0 -
I don't understand how a man can fake an orgasm. (see item 17) Any women..( or man for that matter ) would surely know one way or the other>0
-
Vote to hold all the sessions in Brussels, they can leave Strasbourg open but unused.edmundintokyo said:
It's not "lest they annoy the French" (or anyone else), it's "because it would obviously be vetoed by the French". They have a veto on closing the Strasbourg parliament. What do you suggest the parliament and the rest of the member states do?OblitusSumMe said:I am very amused that Pope Francis made his highly critical address of the EU at the Parliament in Strasbourg - one of the most visible examples of where the EU has gone wrong. Obsessed by history, unprepared to do things that need doing lest they annoy the French someone. An EU that was at least pretending to be serious would get rid of the Parliament in Strasbourg, but the present EU isn't even pretending.
0 -
Find some way to make France pay for it.edmundintokyo said:
It's not "lest they annoy the French" (or anyone else), it's "because it would obviously be vetoed by the French". They have a veto on closing the Strasbourg parliament. What do you suggest the parliament and the rest of the member states do?OblitusSumMe said:I am very amused that Pope Francis made his highly critical address of the EU at the Parliament in Strasbourg - one of the most visible examples of where the EU has gone wrong. Obsessed by history, unprepared to do things that need doing lest they annoy the French someone. An EU that was at least pretending to be serious would get rid of the Parliament in Strasbourg, but the present EU isn't even pretending.
0 -
If education doesn't deserve tax advantages what charitable activity does? Aren't there something like 100,000 charities in the UK? How many of them would pass muster with Ed's inquisitors? But I don't expect Ed to crack down on other charities that don't deserve the name.Cyclefree said:Pace NickPalmer's comment yesterday: the fact that schools have charitable status is not some recent "eccentricity" (as he put it). Education has been a charitable activity since the time of Queen Elizabeth the First.
0 -
My old school lets the nation use their rowing lake for olympic training.DavidL said:
Co-operation and shared experiences are undoubtedly a good thing. My kid's school make their excellent sports facilities available to local children with talent that can benefit from them.HYUFD said:DavidL My old private school, Tonbridge, as well as providing bursaries and scholarships is a partner of a Medway Academy and teachers teach there on sabbatical and ex pupils on gap years, while Tonbridge also benefits from learning about some of the methods the Academy uses on bullying etc
But the argument that these schools are being subsidised instead of actually subsidising the state sector is completely false. And dishonest. And pathetic.
But I guess that won't count, right?0 -
My Dyslexic, autistic son was utterly failed by the state system and is now thriving in a independent school.Cyclefree said:
Maybe.bigjohnowls said:
More squealing will only help Ed.Scott_P said:@NewJournal: Labour's Tristram Hunt told his plans for private schools are 'offensive bigotry' - by his old fee-paying school http://t.co/KtR2rwLJQK
But what was notable to me from this morning's interview was that the Shadow Education Secretary had absolutely nothing to say about how he was going to improve state schools where over 90% of our children are educated. Nothing. That ought to worry every Labour supporter and every parent in the country.
The school were kind enough to provide a bursary as they recognised his need.
0 -
And some of them are tax wheezes. Labour wouldn't even like a clampdown on those.glw said:
If education doesn't deserve tax advantages what charitable activity does? Aren't there something like 100,000 charities in the UK? How many of them would pass muster with Ed's inquisitors? But I don't expect Ed to crack down on other charities that don't deserve the name.Cyclefree said:Pace NickPalmer's comment yesterday: the fact that schools have charitable status is not some recent "eccentricity" (as he put it). Education has been a charitable activity since the time of Queen Elizabeth the First.
0 -
If the Marxist dream of stopping school's being charities became real one day, they'd become businesses and have to charge VAT on fees. 20% increase in cost overnight.
Nice eh.0 -
We will see,MikeL said:
Not necessarily - only 24 more hours has passed since Rochester.bigjohnowls said:Tonights YG will surely see a Tory bouceback?
There should be some bounceback by the start of next week - but I wouldn't be at all sure of any before then.
From the Express a poll about which party was most in touch with ordinary WWC
Asked which party was most in touch with the views of white working class people, 27 per cent of people named Ukip compared to 21 per cent who pointed to Labour.
Just nine per cent identified the Conservatives and two per cent the Lib Dems, although 29 per cent said none of the parties was in touch.
0 -
@Sun_Politics: YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour lead drops to one point: CON 32%, LAB 33%, LD 7%, UKIP 16%, GRN 6%0
-
YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour lead drops to one point: CON 32%, LAB 33%, LD 7%, UKIP 16%, GRN 6%0
-
Well, that 24 hours of good Labour polls was nice while it lasted.0
-
Big John was spot on!Scott_P said:@Sun_Politics: YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour lead drops to one point: CON 32%, LAB 33%, LD 7%, UKIP 16%, GRN 6%
0 -
Sun Politics @Sun_Politics · now 3 seconds ago
YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour lead drops to one point: CON 32%, LAB 33%, LD 7%, UKIP 16%, GRN 6%0 -
Sun Politics @Sun_Politics 46s47 seconds ago
YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour lead drops to one point: CON 32%, LAB 33%, LD 7%, UKIP 16%, GRN 6%0 -
Having attended one Public School, sent children to two others, I have to say that all three that I had involvement with were active and keen on local community involvement, enrichment integration, educated pupils to have a social conscience and were fully involved in many ways in the local community, to the benefit of the locals (or do I mean plebs, as that is the way Labour appear to be trying to paint things).0
-
Four polls in a row with Lab lead!
Lab = Man City
Tories = Bayern0 -
Labour lead down to 1 point eh. That will be the Tory collapse in England Mr Smithson was telling us all about yesterday.0
-
Eccentricity is not moderated by the passage of time! But in the absence of a general education system it must have made more sense.Cyclefree said:
Pace NickPalmer's comment yesterday: the fact that schools have charitable status is not some recent "eccentricity" (as he put it). Education has been a charitable activity since the time of Queen Elizabeth the First.
0 -
Bah.Sunil_Prasannan said:Four polls in a row with Lab lead!
Lab = Man City
Tories = Bayern
Tories = Depeche Mode
Lab = Joe Dolce
Or
Tories = The Wrath of Khan
Lab = The Final Frontier0 -
On top of that the rather large cost of meeting my sons needs from the public purse has now been removed.Floater said:
My Dyslexic, autistic son was utterly failed by the state system and is now thriving in a independent school.Cyclefree said:
Maybe.bigjohnowls said:
More squealing will only help Ed.Scott_P said:@NewJournal: Labour's Tristram Hunt told his plans for private schools are 'offensive bigotry' - by his old fee-paying school http://t.co/KtR2rwLJQK
But what was notable to me from this morning's interview was that the Shadow Education Secretary had absolutely nothing to say about how he was going to improve state schools where over 90% of our children are educated. Nothing. That ought to worry every Labour supporter and every parent in the country.
The school were kind enough to provide a bursary as they recognised his need.
The school provides far more than the State were prepared to provide to him.
Oh and I still provide a huge tax haul for the Government to piss up the wall.0 -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11253059/Jeremy-Hunt-I-take-my-children-to-AandE-because-GP-wait-takes-too-long.html
Reforms of NHS going well then0 -
I've spent most of today thinking about what the biggest benefit of having a private education was for me.
It isn't a brilliant understanding and knowledge of history, but it was giving a lot of self confidence in oneself.0 -
TheScreamingEagles said:
Bah.Sunil_Prasannan said:Four polls in a row with Lab lead!
Lab = Man City
Tories = Bayern
Tories = Depeche Mode
Lab = Joe Dolce
Or
Tories = The Wrath of Khan
Lab = The Final Frontier
At this stage, looks like crossover is unlikely in next week's ELBOW.TheScreamingEagles said:
Bah.Sunil_Prasannan said:Four polls in a row with Lab lead!
Lab = Man City
Tories = Bayern
Tories = Depeche Mode
Lab = Joe Dolce
Or
Tories = The Wrath of Khan
Lab = The Final Frontier0 -
Indeed, that was one hell of a hostage to fortune statement from OGH. The only party whose polling VI has collapsed is the LibDems.steve_garner said:Labour lead down to 1 point eh. That will be the Tory collapse in England Mr Smithson was telling us all about yesterday.
0 -
You'd think a 20 point drop in support for the three established parties compared to 2010 would be making a bigger media impact than it is.0
-
I forecast crossover in ELBOW by the end of January.Sunil_Prasannan said:TheScreamingEagles said:
Bah.Sunil_Prasannan said:Four polls in a row with Lab lead!
Lab = Man City
Tories = Bayern
Tories = Depeche Mode
Lab = Joe Dolce
Or
Tories = The Wrath of Khan
Lab = The Final Frontier
At this stage, looks like crossover is unlikely in next week's ELBOW.TheScreamingEagles said:
Bah.Sunil_Prasannan said:Four polls in a row with Lab lead!
Lab = Man City
Tories = Bayern
Tories = Depeche Mode
Lab = Joe Dolce
Or
Tories = The Wrath of Khan
Lab = The Final Frontier0 -
Do you mean Ultravox?TheScreamingEagles said:
Bah.Sunil_Prasannan said:Four polls in a row with Lab lead!
Lab = Man City
Tories = Bayern
Tories = Depeche Mode
Lab = Joe Dolce
Or
Tories = The Wrath of Khan
Lab = The Final Frontier
0 -
So the Labour bounce yesterday lasted all of a day and they are still 2 points away from that crucial 35%. UKIP down 2 and Tories up 2 shows all that has happened is Tories have moved to UKIP and now back again0
-
If it hastens the realisation that the GP system as we have it was suited to 1940s to 1980s and is no longer fit for purpose to fulfil the role in a modern NHS, then it will be progress.bigjohnowls said:0 -
No, Sunil is a Depeche Mode fan, and well Joe Dolce beat Ultravox to number 1, something Ed won't do next year (I hope)Grandiose said:
Do you mean Ultravox?TheScreamingEagles said:
Bah.Sunil_Prasannan said:Four polls in a row with Lab lead!
Lab = Man City
Tories = Bayern
Tories = Depeche Mode
Lab = Joe Dolce
Or
Tories = The Wrath of Khan
Lab = The Final Frontier0 -
BTW - Did any of you notice the subtle pop music references in nighthawks?0
-
Another Music reference - ElbowTheScreamingEagles said:
I forecast crossover in ELBOW by the end of January.Sunil_Prasannan said:TheScreamingEagles said:
Bah.Sunil_Prasannan said:Four polls in a row with Lab lead!
Lab = Man City
Tories = Bayern
Tories = Depeche Mode
Lab = Joe Dolce
Or
Tories = The Wrath of Khan
Lab = The Final Frontier
At this stage, looks like crossover is unlikely in next week's ELBOW.TheScreamingEagles said:
Bah.Sunil_Prasannan said:Four polls in a row with Lab lead!
Lab = Man City
Tories = Bayern
Tories = Depeche Mode
Lab = Joe Dolce
Or
Tories = The Wrath of Khan
Lab = The Final Frontier0 -
And on and on and on?TheScreamingEagles said:BTW - Did any of you notice the subtle pop music references in nighthawks?
0 -
It might happen the week after next! But we'll see!TheScreamingEagles said:
I forecast crossover in ELBOW by the end of January.Sunil_Prasannan said:TheScreamingEagles said:
Bah.Sunil_Prasannan said:Four polls in a row with Lab lead!
Lab = Man City
Tories = Bayern
Tories = Depeche Mode
Lab = Joe Dolce
Or
Tories = The Wrath of Khan
Lab = The Final Frontier
At this stage, looks like crossover is unlikely in next week's ELBOW.TheScreamingEagles said:
Bah.Sunil_Prasannan said:Four polls in a row with Lab lead!
Lab = Man City
Tories = Bayern
Tories = Depeche Mode
Lab = Joe Dolce
Or
Tories = The Wrath of Khan
Lab = The Final Frontier0 -
Yup, and the Kenny Loggins references.Sunil_Prasannan said:
And on and on and on?TheScreamingEagles said:BTW - Did any of you notice the subtle pop music references in nighthawks?
0 -
To be honest, I don't really like tax exemptions, so I'm not opposed in principle to more organisations paying taxes they currently avoid. But Labour's plan to tax public schools has little to do with the money, and more to do with Labour's prejudices that everybody must have the same education, and that the state knows best. If they were really bothered about the potential abuse of charitable status they'd be casting the net much wider.philiph said:
And some of them are tax wheezes. Labour wouldn't even like a clampdown on those.glw said:
If education doesn't deserve tax advantages what charitable activity does? Aren't there something like 100,000 charities in the UK? How many of them would pass muster with Ed's inquisitors? But I don't expect Ed to crack down on other charities that don't deserve the name.Cyclefree said:Pace NickPalmer's comment yesterday: the fact that schools have charitable status is not some recent "eccentricity" (as he put it). Education has been a charitable activity since the time of Queen Elizabeth the First.
0 -
Lab average poll lead this week 3.75% (4 polls)
Tonights YG LAB 326 CON 277 LD 19 (UKPR)
EICIPM0 -
Sure, France has a veto. All of the other member states equally have a veto on a whole bunch of stuff.edmundintokyo said:
It's not "lest they annoy the French" (or anyone else), it's "because it would obviously be vetoed by the French". They have a veto on closing the Strasbourg parliament. What do you suggest the parliament and the rest of the member states do?OblitusSumMe said:I am very amused that Pope Francis made his highly critical address of the EU at the Parliament in Strasbourg - one of the most visible examples of where the EU has gone wrong. Obsessed by history, unprepared to do things that need doing lest they annoy the French someone. An EU that was at least pretending to be serious would get rid of the Parliament in Strasbourg, but the present EU isn't even pretending.
If someone was to grab the EU by the scruff of its neck they would be able to have a showdown over this sort of thing and force France to back down. It might need some leader with the charisma and cross-European appeal to win a genuine democratic mandate, for example. That's roughly the way in which the veto power of the House of Lords was broken in the British political system, for example.
Instead the response is, a shrug of the shoulders, "the French have a veto", and nothing is done.
Thus the EU will die. Rejected by its populace for its manifest incompetence.0 -
Indeed, I cannot help but wonder at Gordon Brown's charity.philiph said:
And some of them are tax wheezes. Labour wouldn't even like a clampdown on those.glw said:
If education doesn't deserve tax advantages what charitable activity does? Aren't there something like 100,000 charities in the UK? How many of them would pass muster with Ed's inquisitors? But I don't expect Ed to crack down on other charities that don't deserve the name.Cyclefree said:Pace NickPalmer's comment yesterday: the fact that schools have charitable status is not some recent "eccentricity" (as he put it). Education has been a charitable activity since the time of Queen Elizabeth the First.
Where would the world be without it.
0
