I didn't say every fee paying school. I said the top ones. I'm not sure about the rest. They may do it may not do. Not sure.
Poll: Poll: UK General Election 2017 - Mk II
- Thread starter Zefan
- Start date
- Status
I didn't say every fee paying school. I said the top ones. I'm not sure about the rest. They may do it may not do. Not sure.
The handful of children that would apply too would be eclipsed totally by the thousands it does not.
It doesn't really work like that - entry to most private schools is via a competitive exam and the top few pupils get a scholarship people who don't make the grade get rejected, by pricing them higher you just ensure that the people who go to them need even richer parents. You also end up increasing the costs for the funds used to pay for scholarships both the non means tested ones for academically gifted kids and the means tested ones for kids who can pass the 11+ style entrance exam but whose parents can't afford the fees.
I'm not sure it is correct to assume that all schools are oversubscribed or that this policy will have no impact - that seems to be the standard assumption with the Labour manifesto - that you can introduce taxes and people will all behave just as they did before.
I also don't think taxing people for exercising choice/doing something which saves the state money is a good idea - it isn't very liberal at least.
Not sure about Corbyn's policy on Romanian prostitutes but it's in the Labour manifesto to increase rights for gypsies. The same gypsies who set up camps on school playing fields and can't be shifted for weeks
Oh I agree. i think everybody should and there should certainly be no corporation tax drop this year. I do think the top 5% could chip a little more into the pot as well. on the basis they are paying an effective smaller tax rate than everybody else.
Soldato
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 9,197
- Location
- Southampton, hopefully not too hot, or too cold
Very generally speaking, some of these very wealthy people are not just using their wealth to benefit their families, they are part of the problem affecting the home owning aspirations of the relatively poor. They are "raking it in" through their high rent charges, sometimes with enormous rent empires, leaving the relatively poor no chance of putting savings away for a home owning deposit after paying other essentials.
UK housing has not had a fair supply and demand market for decades, by and large the build rate of new homes has far outstripped demand of a growing UK population, often making house prices rise faster than inflation. But the wealthy have been able to still buy homes to add to their renting empires, further reducing the number of homes available to buy, further freezing out the poor from getting a mortgage while landlords can then shaft them more with increased rents.
This whole situation is similar, but on a larger scale, to how electricity suppliers used to shaft those with pre-pay meters (often the poor) with higher consumption rates than standard meters where we pay by direct debit.
The gap between the wealthy and poor is becoming a chasm, the people doing relatively mundane jobs that make society work rarely earn enough to contribute much Income Tax after getting their minimum wage hourly rate, but money stills needs to be raised to provide goods and services for society... So the relatively wealthy need to accept the burden of more taxation.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,022
- Location
- Billericay, UK
The gospel of Corbyn 'Hate a man who us wealthier then you'. I can't believe people would actually vote a party led by this man, someone who won't condom the IRA or Hamas, whitewashed over any criticism of anti Jewish sentiment within the Labour party and it's Labour members and who's judgement can be summed by his front bench of MacDonald, Thornberry and Abbott.
I would like to think that the swing the poll from the previous thread was largely due to the internet regulations on privacy that the Tories announced which being on a tech forum like this would be unpopular but at when it comes to ticking the box people will remember just who and what they are voting for.
Associate
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2007
- Posts
- 2,184
- Location
- Abingdon
This is an alternative fact. Some schools do have long waiting lists, but not all. Not all private schools are Harrow and Eton. As I've said, having a relative who works in a private school, applications are down on where they would normally be at this time of the year, probably waiting for the outcome of the election.
Ordinarily, this policy would get a lot more focus and be exposed for the madness it is, but its just one aspect of a totally bat-**** crazy manifesto so its just shrugged off.
they're not
This is how i feel and will be voting Conservative.
Lot of those former Lib Dem seats in the South West pretty much any vote is effectively a Tory vote unless voters come back en mass to Lib Dem, no one else stands a chance in those seats - Labour often at 5-7% of the votes.
Whats your problem with Romanian prostitutes, they provide a service that is clearly in demand, alternatively we could just retrain some UK prostitutes to be better and thus invoke the mantra of British jobs for British people.............. I'd hazard a guess that most of those dirty Tory MP's keep those Romanian prostitutes in work anyhow lol
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,022
- Location
- Billericay, UK
The property issues is two fold and it's not all because of wealthy individuals who are 'raking it in'. Sorry to sound like a broken record but look at the last Labour government ONS stats show in the 13 years they were in power the only built 120k houses (vs 225K in the last 6 years). The other factor pensions, with Gordon Brown's raid on pensions an encouraging people not to pay into them and the abysmal annuities you get on pensions pots these days people are forced to look at other investments in order to fund their retirement which has ended up in lots of people becoming small time landlords.
that is the sad thing about them, the lib Dems actually seek to make society fairer - the only way Labour is going to be able to do so is by dragging down the higher earners a bit so that relative poverty decreases...
I mean 'poverty', in relative terms, decreased after the financial crisis in 07/08... it wasn't a good thing! everyone was a bit poorer but because 'the rich' were impacted rather more at the time then there were fewer people classed as being in 'poverty'. That is about the only claim Labour will be able to make, the people currently poor and angry about it will still be poor and angry about it but they'll have taken 'the rich down' a bit and so can claim on paper that 'poverty' has been reduced.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,022
- Location
- Billericay, UK
It makes you wonder why Labour bother standing a candidate (for the sake of party prestige maybe?) you would think that most of that 5-7% would naturally go to the Lib dems which might make a difference.
You realise that Corbyn probably thinks that men who use prostitutes should be sent to prison?
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,022
- Location
- Billericay, UK
Lefty loony has loony ideas, colour me unsurprised.
Associate
- Joined
- 10 Sep 2008
- Posts
- 368
You realise its captain cray-cray himself making stuff up?
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,022
- Location
- Billericay, UK
I wouldn't put anything past Corbyn, I only have to look Abbott to come to that conculsion.
- Status