UK Politics
General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both [email protected] and [email protected] .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
[email protected] appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(
view the rest of the comments
But while that is technically true how would you form a policy around it? If you can afford to pay for private school but not the VAT have it VAT free? But if you can afford the VAT then you must pay it? That would be very hard to enforce and ripe for abuse. A blanket VAT/no VAT on private schools is far easier and overall will be a positive even if some more students will drop down to the state paying for their education.
And yeah, having VAT exception rules for stuff children need to buy, like books cloths food etc is good. But why is that good? Because it applies to everyone not just a select few people rich enough to buy the best books, designer cloths and luxury foods. And public schools are already VAT free - by virtue of being free. This is not a blanket tax on all education, just the luxury side of it which only the wealthy currently partake in.
Pointing out the £7000 cost without putting it into context seems like an argument a conservative would use against this policy - even though there is an overall net gain with it taken into account. Yes we should take it into account but so should we the amount of money brought in. And that is how we decide if it is a good policy or not (and it seems like it will be).
The only real concern here would be if the government implements the tax and does not give that back to the schools - which TBH is a real concern. Though even if it is neutral - the government paying for the extra students but not giving extra overall funds I would still say it is worth while as it is a form, even a small one, of tax on the rich. So long as it does not hurt the public schools (which the government would have not pay for the extra students for that to be true - I am not sure they would go that far).
This "I saved the government £7000 because I took my children out of the state sector so I deserve a tax break for my public-spirited benevolence" is so bogus.
No, it wasn't public spirit, it was self interest. They reckon their kids will get a better education that can help them stay on the top of the socioeconomic pile and they won't have to mix with the plebs. No tax break for that shit. It's not good for society.