Viewing 40 posts - 81 through 120 (of 122 total)
  • Harrow school for boys!
  • anagallis_arvensis
    Full Member

    You could start by adressing the point I make above about teacher training and then maybe progres onto the draining on resources as more experienced teachers leave the state sector to move into the private sector. You could move onto the “charitable status” of private schools, indeed as mentioned by someone earlier in the thread many schools like Harrow recive donations from alumni, I believe that may have a tax implication too.

    wrightyson
    Free Member

    The mrs made an interesting point earlier. We could send the kids to the school but we’d never have the money to keep up with the lifestyle/holidays they have out of term time.

    crikey
    Free Member

    The sums are pretty easy. Cost of educating 7.8% of UK children minus implicit cost of charitable status. The state is quids in. Thank goodness.

    So people who privately educate their children are actually doing the country a favour, those selfless angelic patriots? 🙄

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middling Edition

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middlin...
    Latest Singletrack Videos
    teamhurtmore
    Free Member

    Cost to the exchequer of “charitable status” £100m
    Cost of transferring pupils into state education £2.5bn

    You do the maths…..

    A few weeks ago I was being told that more experienced or better teachers were not making this move. Make your minds up. Anyway, why would they? Working on a Saturday and Sunday would be a mugs game as you say. 😉

    Imagine the blind panic if these schools either chose to close or were forced to.

    anagallis_arvensis
    Full Member

    A few weeks ago I was being told that more experienced or better teachers were not making this move.

    by whom? you still havent addressed my first point.

    Imagine the blind panic if these schools either chose to close or were forced to

    yes I imagine lots of rich people might suddenly start panicing, I wouldnt though

    teamhurtmore
    Free Member

    yes, i dont understand it, plus you were asking mon ami a Paris

    imagine having to teach Tarquin off syllabus – he would be used to it!

    anagallis_arvensis
    Full Member

    yes, i dont understand it

    the state pays for teacher training, the private sector benefits from this hugely, they also benefit from taking experienced teachers from the state sector. Fig 2 here is informative, where did those teachers come from as is fig 7
    http://cee.lse.ac.uk/ceedps/ceedp94.pdf

    teamhurtmore
    Free Member

    The state funds education, universities and med schools etc and the private sector benefits from that too.

    So what’s the solution – no private sector or everyone pays for their own education. You decide.

    Let me guess – the moon since they are not wired correctly?

    anagallis_arvensis
    Full Member

    we’re not talking about them though are we, I’m off now you keep wriggling

    jambalaya
    Free Member

    @aa who’s wriggling, not THM or I ? TMH gave you some numbers and I simply used the word massive to describe the benefit to the state of private schools. If private schools vanished (or had done so whilst my kids where of school age) I wouldn’t have panicked, as I posted elsewhere 2 of my 3 opted for state college for their A levels, where is the panic ?

    teamhurtmore
    Free Member

    Le gallois est un veritable serpent, mon ami. Il aime a se tortiller tous le temps, surtout quand il a perdu un argument.

    A bientot!

    anagallis_arvensis
    Full Member

    If you wish to engage in a discussion you need to address the points raised, especially if like you there is a desperation to win and look clever. Writing some rubbish in french is hardly helpful in this respect.

    I simply used the word massive to describe the benefit to the state of private schools.

    yes and that was a fair point, I went on to present some ideas that show the picture is not as simple as a few headline figures. Raised the point of “blind panic” if private schools were closed.

    LHS
    Free Member

    Surely it is a simple calculation:

    Cost to educate a child in a state school – about £9500 last time i heard.
    Number of children in private schooling – again about 500000 last time i looked.

    To make it easy £10k x 500,000. That’s what £5bn? that the UK tax payer doesn’t have to fund?

    monkeyboyjc
    Full Member

    As for the teacher training what about Dr’s or dentists who go into the private sector – or for that matter any student of higher education.

    Teachers are benifiting society by teaching our kids as well as contibuting to the economy and future economy’s through the children they teach – private or state school, hense the investment by the state.

    anagallis_arvensis
    Full Member

    As for the teacher training what about Dr’s or dentists who go into the private sector – or for that matter any student of higher education.

    yes but we are talking about teachers, besides most Dr’s do both dont they?
    How much does it cost the state to train those private school teachers and then how much does it cost state schools when they lose experienced teachers to the private sector? to reduce the debate to the simple sum you have done is a gross simplification.

    To make it easy £10k x 500,000. That’s what £5bn? that the UK tax payer doesn’t have to fund?

    but how much do those tax payers currently have to spend on educating their kids? Private school fees have increased a lot in the last few decades AFAIK.

    LHS
    Free Member

    It doesn’t really matter what it costs the parents to educate their kids in private schools, that is a choice. The issue here is that by those kids going to private school, they are saving the Government and UK tax payer £5bn a year.

    ninfan
    Free Member

    Of course there are further benefits – there’s about 25,000 foreign students in UK private schools, thats half a billion quid plus into the UK economy,

    most of which gets spent on wages (& therefore taxed), building and maintaining facilities (more jobs, more tax) etc!

    anagallis_arvensis
    Full Member

    The issue here is that by those kids going to private school, they are saving the Government and UK tax payer £5bn a year.

    and just as importantly an underfunded state sector which helps to prop up the private sector is saving those very same people from having to pay more tax.

    LHS
    Free Member

    and just as importantly an underfunded state sector which helps to prop up the private sector is saving those very same people from having to pay more tax.

    heh?

    anagallis_arvensis
    Full Member

    the people who send their kids to private schools, they are the ones who would have to pay more tax are they not?

    ninfan
    Free Member

    they are the ones who would have to pay more tax are they not?

    How? they’ve already paid tax on that money when they’ve earned it (or not as the case may be)

    What tax would they be paying on it if they didn’t use it for school fees?

    anagallis_arvensis
    Full Member

    If private school werent around more tax would have to be raised for education, given our mostly progressive tax system the richer would pay more tax. Question is would it be more or less than they currently spend sending their kids to Eton, Harrow or Reading Bluecoats.

    LHS
    Free Member

    They already pay tax. They are effectively paying twice for their kids education. You could say, they were doing the rest of us a favour.

    richmars
    Full Member

    Everyone would pay more tax, to fund a larger state sector.

    anagallis_arvensis
    Full Member

    You could say, they were doing the rest of us a favour.

    you could, I wouldnt

    ninfan
    Free Member

    Erm, I really don’t know where to begin with how wrong you are there, but you appear to be under the misapprehension that tax rates are set based upon the level of government spending, rather than marginal rates set on a basis of maximal tax revenue

    if that was the case, then there would never be a deficit…

    You would also exacerbate a situation where someone on £15k with no kids, was contributing to the education cost of a millionaires daughter!

    scotroutes
    Full Member

    LHS – your £9.5k figure, is that to take a child through all 13 years of the state system? If so then your £5Bn PER YEAR estimate would surely be way wide of the mark. Or is the estimated cost £9.5k per year?

    LHS
    Free Member

    £9.5k per year.

    El-bent
    Free Member

    You would also exacerbate a situation where someone on £15k with no kids, was contributing to the education cost of a millionaires daughter!

    Not an excuse really. Everyone recognises the value of education, the simple fact of the matter is that the wealthy can afford to give their children the “best”, while they and their associates in whatever colour of Government these days continue to reduce the value of education of everyone else on the basis of cost.

    We should be fighting to prevent this.

    Of course the wealthy don’t want us oiks to be well educated, that would give them competition. Competition is for others, not themselves.

    anagallis_arvensis
    Full Member

    Ninfan are you suggesting that we currently are a maximum tax revenue? Are you suggesting tha we couldnt increase tax revenue if we wanted to spend more? How much income tax does someone on 15k pay currently?

    scotroutes
    Full Member

    A quick Google search suggests £16k for the total cost from ages 5 to 16, though that was a 2008 figure. I’d be surprised if it has gone up so much in 6 years though.

    pedroball
    Free Member

    http://apps.charitycommission.gov.uk/Accounts/Ends33/0000310033_AC_20120831_E_C.pdf

    Harrow earned £45m in the last year’s accounts, of which £33m was from fees, the balance from trading income and a one off deal on their land.

    The teacher’s salary costs (inc costs of emp etc) were £13m, with just over 5% of income being spent on scholarships etc (which is largely where they get the charitable status part from).

    As someone who went to a school similar to Harrow, there is no way I’d send my kids to that sort of place. I could just about afford the day fees (on beans and toast living). If you don’t come from the monied families, in my view, you just get an inferority complex from not having a brand new car at 17 or having daddy come and pick you up in his Ferrari.

    The fact that people have to pay to send their kids there I think skews it. Imagine if it was a free service – what would you think of your neighbour if they sent their children away for half the year so they could focus on their own career?

    And then theres the fact you don’t see your parents day in day out through what are your most formative years, when you probably most need that support network?

    anagallis_arvensis
    Full Member

    if Harrow wasnt a charity what % of that income would be spent in tax anyone know? I presume its more than the 5% they spend on scholarships?

    pedroball
    Free Member

    as an estimate, 20% tax on £3.8m net increase in funds = £771k

    jfletch
    Free Member

    AA – On a purely financial basis you are wrong. Yes the state does subsidise the private education sector slightly in comaparison to some other private industries; but they still make a net benefit to the economy before you factor in not having to edcuate the 500,000 extra children.

    Teacher training? – How is this different from accountancy training for people to work in the city or engineering degrees to enable manufacturing jobs. The state chooses to create a capable work force to the benefit of all. It matters not where these people end up working. Also it’s a tiny number. (Circa £750 – 500 million lifetime cost of funding all the teacher training for teachers currently teaching in private schools, thats £10-£20 million per year to fund new teachers entering private schools, assuming that all the teachers have undertaken a state funded PGCE or similar, a lot of them won’t have)

    Cost to schools of experienced staff leaving? – Again this is negligible since pay isn’t all that different between sectors and the state has the benefit of good pensions. You could argue that the private sector causes pay inflation in the state sector but then you would be arguing for a reduction in teacher pay through abolishment of the private sector. Would that be a good thing? That would just lead to a lower quailty of teachers throughout.

    Tax on donations? – Very spurious point. If some rich person has money to donate, maybe for tax efficency reasons, maybe just for alturistic reasons they will donate it to somebody. Mostly this will be a charity the performs a function that in a more left wing society would be funded by the state. (look up the french atitude to charity, very interesting! We are one of the most charitable nations on earth)

    There really is no doubt that getting rid of private education would be very, very costly. There is no way this cost could be recouped from taxation without affecting everybody, tax may be progressive but it’s not that progressive. Just look at the controvesy surround teh 50p tax rate and that didn’t even generate enough cash to pay for 1/5th of this extra education.

    You could argue on idealistic grounds or even on some majestic macro econmic ideal where the country would benefit for a more equal society leading to greater prosperity etc. But on a simple cost comparison you are well wide of the mark.

    anagallis_arvensis
    Full Member

    But on a simple cost comparison you are well wide of the mark.

    To be clear I have never said the state would save from getting rid of private sector all I have said was that its not a simple as multplying x numbers of private school kids by y the cost of educating a kid by the state. Many other factors are important.

    Yes the state does subsidise the private education sector slightly

    so we agree broadly on the point, its the extent we disagree on.

    Teacher training? – How is this different from accountancy training for people to work in the city or engineering degrees to enable manufacturing jobs.

    its not but we are not talking about accountants, it is different from the army though, maybe not dissimilar from the fire service, although we dont have an extensive network of private fire companies doing a comparable service.

    Also it’s a tiny number. (Circa £750 – 500 million lifetime cost of funding all the teacher training for teachers currently teaching in private schools, thats £10-£20 million per year to fund new teachers entering private schools, assuming that all the teachers have undertaken a state funded PGCE or similar, a lot of them won’t have)

    where did these figures come from?

    Cost to schools of experienced staff leaving? – Again this is negligible since pay isn’t all that different between sectors and the state has the benefit of good pensions.

    how do you know its negligible? Private teachers can get the same pension. The private sector taking experienced staff is important as experienced staff are, all other things being equal, better. The private sector also tend to get better qualified teachers end take a greater proportion of those teachers who are qualified in shortage subjects too. Not to mention me spending a good deal of my time training teachers who go straight off into the private sector, thats state schools directly training teachers for private schools whilst they are on their work placements. All of this may be hard to quantify but it shouldnt therefore be dismissed as negligible.
    Have you read the paper I linked to on the last page?

    ninfan
    Free Member

    Ninfan are you suggesting that we currently are a maximum tax revenue?

    pretty close to optimal – ie. if we put taxes rates up any further, then we would take in less in total (see laffer curve discussions passim)

    Are you suggesting tha we couldnt increase tax revenue if we wanted to spend more?

    Not sustainably, i.e. if we put it up in the short term, it would depress tax receipts in the longer term (see laffer curve discussions passim)

    How much income tax does someone on 15k pay currently?

    About £1350 per year, plus about £900 NI.

    At the moment, the UK government is spending about £100 billion per year more than it takes in in taxes – you would need to increase tax receipts by about £3000 per working age adult just to break even!

    jfletch
    Free Member

    AA ahh so you are from the quote and disect school of internet arguing. How fun!

    Anyway I think you are getting confused between a subsidy and a net drain on the exchequer. Private schools get a small subsidy by operating as a charity (£100 million was quoted earlier) but this gets repaid by educating people that the state would otherwise have to fund, employing people and bringing cash into the country by educating foreigners, the other costs you are worried about are valid but tiny. So the private education sector is massively in the black as far as the exchequer is concerned. I chose to highlight this to you with the use of some very simple numbers, it really isn’t in doubt that private edcuation is good for the exchequer as it stands today.

    Like I said an arguement based on ideals may have more weight, especially with the lefties on here but trying to claim that 1+1 = 3 isn’t going to work.

    pedroball
    Free Member

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/consumertips/tax/10638283/How-much-we-give-the-state-in-tax-and-how-much-we-get-back.html

    While someone on £15k might pay tax and NI, this recent study suggests that they are a net recipient from the Government. The bar is pretty high in terms of where the net contribution hurdle starts.

    Richie_B
    Full Member

    Its the amounts that Stowe have got out of the Hermitage Lottery Fund & Eton have got out of the Olympics in the last couple of years which gets me.

    I can understand how much schools like that cost to run but can’t see why we are paying for the repairs and maintenance (even if it means that mortals can visit on the couple of days of year or the times of day when it is convenient to them).

    For that matter I can’t see how they are given charitable status

Viewing 40 posts - 81 through 120 (of 122 total)

The topic ‘Harrow school for boys!’ is closed to new replies.