5 ms·

> The majority of state school provision in the UK is atrocious. I don't think this is really true anymore. I agree state schools were truly awful in the 80s/9

by nvarsj 7y ago

> The majority of state school provision in the UK is atrocious. I don't think this is really true anymore. I agree state schools were truly awful in the 80s/90s (my partner who went to state school didn't even learn times tables). Quality of state school has improved tremendously over the last 20 years, and I'd say it's very good these days. Especially as middle class families are priced out of independent schools. In fact I'd even say it may be better for your kids to go to the local state school nowadays, otherwise you are isolating them from their local community. > Not a penny of your tax goes to subsidising their education. I, of course, totally disagree :). I toured many London independent schools last year for secondary, and you just need to take a look at the amazing school grounds to see the benefits of charitable status. [1] These are for-profit institutions with huge bursaries that avoid paying almost all taxes. Any tax exemption is equivalent to a subsidy that I am funding as a taxpayer. 1. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/charities-detailed-guidance-notes/annex-i-tax-exemptions-for-charities https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/charities-detaile...

barry-cotter 7y ago
> These are for-profit institutions with huge bursaries that avoid paying almost all taxes. If it doesn’t have beneficial owners it’s not a for-profit. Eton is in the same position as Oxford as far as having owners who receive profits from it goes. Neither do. They’re run with some regard to the idea of a mission, on inertia with the biggest impact coming from current staff. That’s not saying they’re perfect, or that they should be allowed to continue to exist. Plenty of UK citizens hate them and the class they represent and want them destroyed. If they get a government elected that wants them destroyed they will be. Nothing lasts forever.
lucozade 7y ago
Turns out I'm about 5 years out of date [1], I retract. Schools have improved markedly in the last 5 years. In what way are they for profit institutions? Who is profiting financially? They're charities (for the most part) and are legally obliged to be run like charities. Now if you're suggesting that some or all of them are paying dividends to some secret investor then sure. But you're not, presumably. Again, it's fine for you not to agree with private schools. I understand that. But to suggest that you're somehow paying for them doesn't bear scrutiny. [1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-50563833 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-50563833

by nvarsj 7y ago

barry-cotter 7y ago

> These are for-profit institutions with huge bursaries that avoid paying almost all taxes. If it doesn’t have beneficial owners it’s not a for-profit. Eton is in the same position as Oxford as far as having owners who receive profits from it goes. Neither do. They’re run with some regard to the idea of a mission, on inertia with the biggest impact coming from current staff. That’s not saying they’re perfect, or that they should be allowed to continue to exist. Plenty of UK citizens hate them and the class they represent and want them destroyed. If they get a government elected that wants them destroyed they will be. Nothing lasts forever.

lucozade 7y ago

Turns out I'm about 5 years out of date [1], I retract. Schools have improved markedly in the last 5 years. In what way are they for profit institutions? Who is profiting financially? They're charities (for the most part) and are legally obliged to be run like charities. Now if you're suggesting that some or all of them are paying dividends to some secret investor then sure. But you're not, presumably. Again, it's fine for you not to agree with private schools. I understand that. But to suggest that you're somehow paying for them doesn't bear scrutiny. [1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-50563833 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-50563833