Or was it the spotted dick?
Is there anyone that isn’t paying for an independent school education that disagrees with this policy?
So he should pay for this policy by raising taxes for everybody, which as you say, nobody will be in favour of. Do you see the dilemma here?
1 Like
No, that is not what I am saying - I am saying the policy should not be necessary because we should have a society that is taxed appropriately to provide services where necessary … cant you see how unjust it is to say ''we cant afford this so we need to raise more tax… but we know that we wont get voted in if we suggest a rational and sensible grown up debate about the levelof tax needed to provide the services of a modern society… which is currently inadequate… instead we will tax a small portion only who already get nothing from around 2k a year in tax they contribiute towards education and happily pay it, and who mostly dont vote for us anyway because they are all the super rich, elite/middle classes…blah blah blah up his own arse naive and ignornate rhetoric… ‘’
I didn’t think much of beef burgers in pastry or spam fritters (thinking about them clogs my arteries and causes a headache).
… its also about the classic crap that comes with trying to compartmentalise people into political silos - that you have to follow a single doctrine, that you cant possibly be clased as having a social conscience if you have worked and saved and saved and are well paid (despite paying in a huge and larger wedge as a result) and that these folks should pay even more … What turns folks away form the socialist principles many champion in their youth is this constant patronizing shit that you shoudl feel guilty about any success you have had and feel good about giving it away… even though you already pay in more as a result… the fact that so many in politics or with political opinions feel that doctrine must remain as it was originally conceived as opposed to evolve to meet the changing and challenging contemporary environment is another reason why many feel disenfranchised by politics, that it does not represent them… and why Labour is fucked… not only by Brexit, but by its own leadership stuck in a Dickensian Zeitgeist
I’m alright Jack?
I woudl not agree with this policy if my daughter went to a state school - its called a principle pap… note you never addreed my point on such things re the lack of standing up for their principles shown by our own MPs in the Brexit debate fiasco… ‘‘Sshhh If I dont mention it no one will notice…’’
1 Like
I completely agree with you…in an ideal word. Unfortunately, our world is far from ideal and Corbyn has to find a way to make this policy work. Sorry, but sometimes you have to bear the brunt for the greater good - this is one of those times i’m afraid.
1 Like
So you’re saying that if your kid went to a state school, you’d be like “Oh noes! Think of those affluent strugglers!”
Fuck the fuck off, @areloa-grandee 
Your entire position is predicated on “me, me, me, mine, mine, mine!”
That’s not his job and it Never Will Be. His job is just to sit around going, wouldn’t it be cool if we bought everyone lunch, wouldn’t it be fair if we gave iphones to africans, wouldn’t it be equality if receptionists had as much money as footballers, wouldn’t it be better to ask terrorists to chill rather than kill them, wouldn’t it be nice if i was president
3 Likes
The sad deluded mantra of the those who have lost the argument and need to insult… not the first time from you pap. And so wide of the mark… believe it if you like, makes no difference, but its this delusion that fuels your misguided belief in Corbyn or that Brexit will be a good thing… the inflexibilty of out-dated doctrine is what is selfish, as it denies the masses a credible and electable opposition…
I’m sorry, could you flesh this out a little more? I’m not quite sure where I said you were in any kind of possession of a silver spoon.
I did say that if you’re able to send your kids to a private school you were well-off by more-or-less any metric.
If you disagree, let us know your household income and we can measure that up against the national average, pop you down on an bell curve/distribution graph of UK incomes and clear up any doubts.
Mr Ferret, all I’m saying (and bear in mind, I’m no socialist), is that objecting to private education isn’t a particularly extreme point of a view for a lefty. The morality behind it is consistent and makes perfect sense *if* you believe equality to be a universal good which policy should be subordinated to
A) This is an argument that everyone can use for everything when it comes to a tax hike. “The X that I’m paying for Y really is the absolutely total maximum that I can afford”. I tend to have more sympathy for my work colleagues earning £8 per hour who start paying taxes on their earnings if they work more than like 20 hours per week when they make this argument, but private school parents? Sorry, not so much.
B) Yeah no I agree completely with this. The fact that you’re paying into a system upon which you place no demand is a good thing. This is why I’m not opposed to private schools.
C) This is just a word salad. You might as well have just said “but they local schools really are reaally reaaaaaaally bad!” We get it. You can afford private education and the local state schools suck. That’s fine and I don’t object to you doing so, but there’s no objective minimum standard below which sending your kids private becomes justified whereas if the local state schools hit it then everythings hunky dory.
Anyway, in answer to your questions.
-
No. Its a violation of freedom and would scythe down a load of the tax take from private schools which as you say, is spent on state education. However, I don’t see it as in any way outrageous that a socialist would rank equality above that in their moral pecking order, and therefore disagree.
-
Who knows? Maybe they don’t want them to mix with the hoi polloi? Maybe they really are aghast at the state of the local state schools. Different strokes, different folks.
-
Again, this is just a variant of “I’m paying enough tax, more isn’t fair”. And hey! I actually have a lot of sympathy for this point of view! But it isn’t any different to anyone else saying the same thing about any other kind of tax on the upper-middle to upper class.
-
Again, ‘rights’ are social constructs with no exact definition independent of human whims and opinions, and therefore the same can be said of ‘luxury’.
Anyway; bottom line is I’m against the abolition of private schools, but I can’t for the life of me see why its just totally beyond the pale for a socialist to be in favour of getting rid of them.
Screw the kids, Jeremy gets my vote if he gets “The Rich” to pay for my bar tabs.
1 Like
I’ll sum up, the rich shouldn’t pay for the mistakes of Governments, higher and fairer taxation.
1 Like
We’re still waiting for someone other than an independent fee payer to say this is a bad idea.
And insult? Please. You’ve obviously been spending too much time with middle class parents that don’t say “fuck”.
Would never have happened if you’d sent your kids to a comp.
Wow, another lightbulb moment from Labour’s commander-in-chief.
I have various issues with this:
-
The assumption that everyone who goes to private school is rich. That’s just not true - many parents scrimp, save and sacrifice to try to get their children an alternative education - to add 20% to these prices is utter madness.
-
What happens to children who are already in private education? To bump up costs by 20% for parents who can’t afford it, and have to move their children back into state school could result in that money being wasted for those parents. I think the 20% increase should only be applicable to new starters if this was a serious policy.
-
This should raise around £1.8b. Fuck spending that on shit flans and bollocks chocloate mousses. Spend it on something useful, like 60,000 new teachers to reduce school class sizes - that’s 3 per school on average.
1 Like
Of course there is. Me.
3 Likes