Election Year or Fear!

[ramAnag]

And how much would Ms Reeves need to raise in extra taxes for that? OBR says 38% of GDP goes to the government in tax already (and they spend 44% of GDP), so fix this and NHS too and we'd likely be at around 50% ++. It would be "better" to have perfect facilities free to everyone across the public sector but GB Limited can't afford it. In fact I doubt any developed economy can.

Let's hope all our new doctors and engineers can help supercharge the economy to meet these aims, but sadly all this is just pie in the sky

You’re right of course and I acknowledge that, however you asked about the future of public schools (private education) and my response is that the current situation exemplifies the inequality to be found in the UK (and the US) today.
Money must be available, how else can such schools thrive with fees (per pupil) well in excess of the national average wage?
I don’t have the answer or the solution. Don’t even know if there is one. I’m just suggesting that, in the interest of fairness, it is unjustifiable for the wealthiest 7-8% to have access to such facilities while the vast majority have to make do and mend. It’s not a new situation but some of the facilities I’ve seen recently have reinforced my view of this particular inequity.

[Andy_Faber]

You’re right of course and I acknowledge that, however you asked about the future of public schools (private education) and my response is that the current situation exemplifies the inequality to be found in the UK (and the US) today.
Money must be available, how else can such schools thrive with fees (per pupil) well in excess of the national average wage?
I don’t have the answer or the solution. Don’t even know if there is one. I’m just suggesting that, in the interest of fairness, it is unjustifiable for the wealthiest 7-8% to have access to such facilities while the vast majority have to make do and mend. It’s not a new situation but some of the facilities I’ve seen recently have reinforced my view of this particular inequity.

What exactly do you mean 'money must be available'? Are you suggesting that private school fees would just be handed over to the state?

[ramAnag]

What exactly do you mean 'money must be available'? Are you suggesting that private school fees would just be handed over to the state?

Not at all. Odd conclusion. I’m just saying that the top 6-8% must have the ability to pay such fees at a time when the fees for each child are often in excess of the average annual salary.

I suppose the question then is, is it justifiable for a privileged elite in the country to have access to such essentials as better health care and better educational facilities? Doubt we’ll answer it definitively.

[Andy_Faber]

Not at all. Odd conclusion. I’m just saying that the top 6-8% must have the ability to pay such fees at a time when the fees for each child are often in excess of the average annual salary.

I suppose the question then is, is it justifiable for a privileged elite in the country to have access to such essentials as better health care and better educational facilities? Doubt we’ll answer it definitively.

I still don't get the first paragraph but the question in your second paragraph suggests you don't 'get' the breadth of people, their personal circumstances or their determination in relation to the choice of state or fee paying education. Most choosing the fee-paying route aren't 'privileged elite', most that I know (I know a fair few and I'm sure you can guess why) are in stable relationships, maybe a bit better off than the average but by no means 'rich', focussed on their children's path through life and willing to forego certain things around time and money to enable that. IMO 'it' is justifiable in the same way as its justifiable for parents to do ****-all for the education of their kids. NB I'm not talking about those able to afford Eton etc, such establishments are outliers in this discussion to me

[ramAnag]

I still don't get the first paragraph but the question in your second paragraph suggests you don't 'get' the breadth of people, their personal circumstances or their determination in relation to the choice of state or fee paying education. Most choosing the fee-paying route aren't 'privileged elite', most that I know (I know a fair few and I'm sure you can guess why) are in stable relationships, maybe a bit better off than the average but by no means 'rich', focussed on their children's path through life and willing to forego certain things around time and money to enable that. IMO 'it' is justifiable in the same way as its justifiable for parents to do ****-all for the education of their kids. NB I'm not talking about those able to afford Eton etc, such establishments are outliers in this discussion to me

Bit cryptic, not sure I can guess why. I understand you differentiating between Eton and the more local likes of Trent College, Abbotsholme and Denstone but they are still extremely expensive and out of the reach of most people.

Your view is that being wealthy enough to access such facilities is justifiable and you are, of course, fully entitled to that view. I’m not so comfortable with the situation and find the fact that, I think, 20 Prime Ministers went to Eton, emblematic of the situation and a cause for concern.

What I’m more certain of is that it is never ‘justifiable for parents to do **** all for the education of their kids’ and I’m puzzled by that contrary comment from you.

[Andy_Faber]

Bit cryptic, not sure I can guess why. I understand you differentiating between Eton and the more local likes of Trent College, Abbotsholme and Denstone but they are still extremely expensive and out of the reach of most people.

Your view is that being wealthy enough to access such facilities is justifiable and you are, of course, fully entitled to that view. I?m not so comfortable with the situation and find the fact that, I think, 20 Prime Ministers went to Eton, emblematic of the situation and a cause for concern.

What I?m more certain of is that it is never ?justifiable for parents to do **** all for the education of their kids? and I?m puzzled by that contrary comment from you.

Maybe I didn't word that last paragraph well. Its a free world, if parents feel their kids' best interests are served by taking them on expensive holidays, having generous allowances, latest tech etc but never spend minute one helping them with school work/issues then that's their choice and it can't be legislated against

But there's the other side of the coin. Forget Eton, focus on (and don't forget, not-for-profit) Trent etc. Yes there are a few parents who's financial headroom is enormous but there are also lots of 'ordinary' parents setting their stall out to invest their disposable income in their children. Again its a free world, why should they not give their hard earned cash to a school instead of a tour operator or other such luxury.

I also don't see a big difference between parents who want the best and go to the fee paying option and those who choose to invest their money in relocating into a good school's catchment - its still use of what you seem to see as an unfair advantage, ie cash, however honestly and/or back breakingly its been attained, to give children the best available. Likewise state school parents who pour money into private tuition.

Not suggesting there's not inequality that shouldn't be addressed in the state system more suggessting that paying for education issnt as elitist as you make out

[Geoff Parkstone]

Rather than criticising those parents who chose the fee paying option, those in the state sector should be very pleased that they do. Class sizes would be even more unsustainable if those parents didn't invest in their kids future but simply plonked them in the local comprehensive. Resource management is eased by having less to educate.

That so many ex PMs were educated in the private sector is something of a red herring. That the better educated get involved in politics and want to serve their country isn't a surprise. It's about as unsurprising as saying the majority of British murderers or drug dealers are "educated' in the state system. It's back to the nature or nurture argument

[ramAnag]

Maybe I didn't word that last paragraph well. Its a free world, if parents feel their kids' best interests are served by taking them on expensive holidays, having generous allowances, latest tech etc but never spend minute one helping them with school work/issues then that's their choice and it can't be legislated against

But there's the other side of the coin. Forget Eton, focus on (and don't forget, not-for-profit) Trent etc. Yes there are a few parents who's financial headroom is enormous but there are also lots of 'ordinary' parents setting their stall out to invest their disposable income in their children. Again its a free world, why should they not give their hard earned cash to a school instead of a tour operator or other such luxury.

I also don't see a big difference between parents who want the best and go to the fee paying option and those who choose to invest their money in relocating into a good school's catchment - its still use of what you seem to see as an unfair advantage, ie cash, however honestly and/or back breakingly its been attained, to give children the best available. Likewise state school parents who pour money into private tuition.

Not suggesting there's not inequality that shouldn't be addressed in the state system more suggessting that paying for education issnt as elitist as you make out

All compelling and sensible arguments. It is ‘elitist’ in so much as it is only currently available for (figures vary) approximately 6-8% of children but I fully accept your arguments about parents making sacrifices to seek the best for their children.

What I still find sad is that a small proportion have access to such facilities as - and I have seen all these in the last two years - their own Olympic size pool, golf course, pitches and score boards on a par with the very best semi pro clubs, while others have to play on ‘dog sh1t park’ and the local ‘floating plaster’ pool.

Would that more could enjoy better facilities in a more equitable society throughout their education.