Poll: Poll: UK General Election 2017 - Mk II

[Deleted member 66701]

Of course it will, if fewer people can afford to go/sit the entrance exam then the standard/cut off for admission is lower.

But that means you're implying that there is a ceiling on attainment based on entry level? As an educator, I strongly refute that assertion.

What entrance exams do is allow private schools to achieve the maximum attainment for the least expenditure. Surprising for a private business I know.

Why shouldn't there be choice?

There is choice, levying VAT doesn't change that.

And frankly people making use of private schools or private healthcare are saving the state money. If anything they should be getting a tax rebate not additional tax on top of the fees paid.

That's debatable as removing motivated, healthy and behaved (which private school attendees on the whole are) from the state education system means their qualities do not disseminate to the wider state school population, meaning more resources are required to counter this.

Frankly I'd rather there were more private schools and parents were given a set amount of money from the government to chose the school they want to send their kids to.

I've argued for similar in the past.

 

[V F]

She made me ill

LOL! Why is there always some white female nutter with pink or purple hair saying... "I'll fight anyone talking *bleep* about Diane Abbot"

 

[Macro]

Wow, just listened to Diane Abbott's interview on LBC - wow, if that's our future Home Secretary then we're well and truly in trouble...

Cynical move by Corbyn to hang he out to dry as "ill health" to stop her making a mess of anything else before the election - so much for a humble loyal man persona, more ruthless to even friends to grab power.

 

[StriderX]

Wow, just listened to Diane Abbott's interview on LBC - wow, if that's our future Home Secretary then we're well and truly in trouble...

Cynical move by Corbyn to hang he out to dry as "ill health" to stop her making a mess of anything else before the election - so much for a humble loyal man persona, more ruthless to even friends to grab power.

Boring #terrorists Rudd.

 

[LOAM]

to stop her making a mess of anything else before the election

You could apply that equally to Supreme Leader May.

 

[balky12]

That's debatable as removing motivated, healthy and behaved (which private school attendees on the whole are) from the state education system means their qualities do not disseminate to the wider state school population.

Interesting view. Would you rather there not be private education then? So all these motivated, healthy and behaved children can improve state schools and the average attendee?

 

[Deleted member 66701]

Wow, just listened to Diane Abbott's interview on LBC - wow, if that's our future Home Secretary then we're well and truly in trouble...

There is no chance she'll be home secretary.

Cynical move by Corbyn to hang he out to dry as "ill health" to stop her making a mess of anything else before the election - so much for a humble loyal man persona, more ruthless to even friends to grab power.

Poor chap can't win.

Make Abbot shadow home secretary = OMG - what a bad decision!
Remove Abbot as shadow home secretary = OMG - what a bad decision!

 

[ethan]

You could apply that equally to Supreme Leader May.

...and would explain the refusal to John Snow.

 

[wildman]

LOL! Why is there always some white female nutter with pink or purple hair saying... "I'll fight anyone talking *bleep* about Diane Abbot"

i'll take your Abbott and raise you Johnson, Rudd and Hunt, all equally idiotic and dangerous

 

[Hades]

That's debatable as removing motivated, healthy and behaved (which private school attendees on the whole are) from the state education system means their qualities do not disseminate to the wider state school population, meaning more resources are required to counter this.



I've argued for similar in the past.

It's not my job or the job of my kids to make sure other people's children are motivated and behaved. The accountability for that lays with people working in the education system and the other children's parents. If they fail at that then I am more likely to take my kids out of the system to ensure my kids get the best chance in life. It does not motivate me to pick up the slack left by others.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

Interesting view. Would you rather there not be private education then? So all these motivated, healthy and behaved children can improve state schools and the average attendee?

I would rather the state education was good enough that private education held no advantages.

As a transition to this point, I would like to see more interaction between the state and private education sectors.

 

[antijoke]

Wow, just listened to Diane Abbott's interview on LBC - wow, if that's our future Home Secretary then we're well and truly in trouble...

Cynical move by Corbyn to hang he out to dry as "ill health" to stop her making a mess of anything else before the election - so much for a humble loyal man persona, more ruthless to even friends to grab power.

You really believe everything you are saying don't you. Lol.

Lest we forget that only a short while ago May was Home Secretary and we know how crap a job she did, but you go ahead and give her a vote of confidence.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

It's not my job or the job or my kids to make sure other people's children are motivated and behaved. The accountability for that are the people in the people working in the education system and the other children's parents. If they fail at that then I am more likely to take my kids out of the system to ensure my kids get the best chance in life. It does not motivate me to pick up the slack left by others.

Typical Tory attitude - whatever happened to big society?

 

[dowie]

But that means you're implying that there is a ceiling on attainment based on entry level? As an educator, I strongly refute that assertion.

I'm not implying anything, it is just fact. I'm stating quite clearly that there is competition for entry to private schools and a cut off whereby people will fail the entrance exam. If you have fewer people able to attend that school then that barrier for entry is lower ergo the other person's point re: lowering standards.

The opposite is true when you allow more potential pupils i.e. if say someone donates funds to a foundation to fund poorer students or perhaps if a previously single sex boys school then decides to admit girls you'll have more candidates for the available places and the standards required will be higher...

Perhaps even when you expand the number of places... Say you have a single sex boys school that usually admits 100 boys a year, they move to co-educational and decide to steadily increase their intake until it gets to 120 pupils a year 60 boys 60 girls... well that means that 40 boys who would have previously been admitted will now fail the entrance exam.

Your standards increase when you have a bigger pool of applicants to pick from and decrease when you've got fewer - such as you'll have by pricing out pupils who'd otherwise have had a shot.

 

[StriderX]

Typical Tory attitude - whatever happened to big society?

What ever happened to a country that works for everyone lol.

 

[Raikiri]

Wow, just listened to Diane Abbott's interview on LBC - wow, if that's our future Home Secretary then we're well and truly in trouble...

Cynical move by Corbyn to hang he out to dry as "ill health" to stop her making a mess of anything else before the election - so much for a humble loyal man persona, more ruthless to even friends to grab power.

Can't really win here with you lot, he's an idiot that only keeping her around because they dated decades ago or he's ruthless and power grabbing if he replaces her?

 

[McPhee]

I do agree with earlier comments about this being like supporting a football team...

lol tories

lol labour

Why are people so unwilling to concede there are pros and cons to both? Nothing wrong with picking a firm favourite but you don't have to make the other to be a pantomime villain!

"Opinion is really the lowest form of human knowledge. It requires no accountability, no understanding."

Forming a snap opinion and loyally standing by it is easy. You only need to parrot what you hear from others. If it's wrong, it's not your fault. You're just repeating what you read/hear.

Gaining knowledge, testing the truth of what you read and hear (particularly important in this age of Social Media), testing your own opinions, and trying to understand the opinion and position of others, that is difficult.

 

[balky12]

I would rather the state education was good enough that private education held no advantages.

As a transition to this point, I would like to see more interaction between the state and private education sectors.

It would always hold an advantage though. No matter how good state education is. Not too dissimilar to different universities holding an advantage.

Again similar to health care. I have never had a bad experience with the NHS from visits to A&E, healthcare my grandparents got when they had Parkinsons, Alzheimer's and dementia, or the heart attack and bypass my father in law received only a few months ago. Service was top notch, more than enough. But private healthcare is still better.

I see nothing wrong with state education anyways. Apply yourself and you can go far.

 

[Vern1961]

As an aside, I bought the Daily Mail today (don't normally, honest ) and the first six pages were filled with almost hysterical gibberish, firmly directed at any waverers in the blue-rinse audience that the world will fall in if the Conservatives don't achieve a landslide victory.

 

[Greebo]

31% of £150,000 is a lot more than 20% of £20,000. In fact, that person earning £150,000 is paying tax equivalent to more than eleven such people. Exactly how many people is such a person supposed to equal in your opinion? Is it a moral failure for a person to put in as much as only eleven other people, in your opinion? Fifteen? I'm curious how many in your view a person is supposed to match, in people units. We'll ignore all those people earning less than £11,500 for purposes of this argument as the £150,000 earner would be putting in an infinite number of times more than them. Please answer in actual terms I've used, btw. You have a person standing in front of you who earns £150,000 p/a. You tell them they should pay ___ number of people's tax because of this. Tell us also how that is fair.

So on that basis you think people on £50k should pay 100% tax so they pay the same as those on £150k? Right.