A real Tory vote winner

BillieTheBot

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1207337/Tory-plan-help-jobless-parents-pay-private-school-fees.html


Until they got found out and scrapped the idea, the Tories have been considering using a pot of cash reserved for state schools to prop up private schools.

Nice to know where their priorities lie, protect the rich and fuck the poor.

Former Member

Education is certainly one area where I have very grave concerns if the Tories get into power.

I'm sorry, but I remain unconvinced that the best possible Tory government ever would be preferrable to the worst Labour government ever. And given that Cameron's team is certainly far from being the best, give me Gordon's tired old Labour every time.

Former Member

TBH I don't think the premise is a bad one. But then I'm a bit of a socialist at times (though that seems such a dirty word saying that, I shouldn't label myself). If someone, anyone, has a bad circumstance, I think state can often help out. And it's not just about being altruistic either - if you consider a highly skilled engineer for example, imagine getting paid £60,000 a year and his wife a similar amount, they send their two kids to private school and are paying off a big mortgage. If he loses his job, then he is forced either to sell the house to continue to pay his kids tuition, or to force his kids to drop out and go to a state school which will cause more harm in the long run.

I think private schools certainly have their place, I don't think it's necessarily fair that not everyone gets to go but they do produce a lot of the brightest minds in the country. By not helping people and forcing them to fuck up their whole lives and family lives because they are inbetween jobs you are causing more damage in social terms than the cost of just giving them a grant / loan to tide them through the tough times.

If you think of a small community like a commune, if one person loses their job then everyone else pitches in a little to help out until they get their next job, as long as is reasonale (so bankrolling them doesnt make sense as its a disincentive to work). I don't think it should matter if that person had a well paid job or not as thats just class envy isn't it?

Former Member

ShyBoy wrote: »

if you consider a highly skilled engineer for example, imagine getting paid £60,000 a year and his wife a similar amount, they send their two kids to private school and are paying off a big mortgage. If he loses his job, then he is forced either to sell the house to continue to pay his kids tuition, or to force his kids to drop out and go to a state school which will cause more harm in the long run.

What harm will it cause the children to go to a *gasp* state school? Have you been watching too much inbetweeners?

If the engineer is on £60,000 a year surely he would have the foresight to put a bit aside for times like this.

I'm all for helping people who are going through tough times, but I think we have more pressing problems than supporting the private education of rich kids, when they can attend a state run school like the rest of the poor blighters whose parents don't earn £60k a year

Former Member

Kangoo all I meant was the upheaval of changing schools. Pretend he was in the same predicament but his kids went to a state school - he lost his job and now had to move and he'd lose contacts with all his friends, his kids would need to change school, he'd be out of the loop in terms of the industry and so on.

Anyway, I wasn't absolutely advocating it to be something we should want, but rather that the idea of helping people where possible isn't altogether bad.

Former Member

ShyBoy wrote: »

Kangoo all I meant was the upheaval of changing schools. Pretend he was in the same predicament but his kids went to a state school - he lost his job and now had to move and he'd lose contacts with all his friends, his kids would need to change school, he'd be out of the loop in terms of the industry and so on.

This happens all the time and people don't get money. This is where I agree with whowhere - protect the rich and fuck the poor summs up the Tories, no matter how much they claim otherwise

However, it's not as simple as just handing out cash : the money in question is the childs allocated funding which would be spent on their state education, but as they are in private education it just goes back in the pot. It could be argued that this money should be spent on the child's education, whether this be state or private - in which case should the parents recieve a contribution? I'm not sure where I stand on this

Former Member

kangoo wrote: »

This happens all the time and people don't get money. This is where I agree with whowhere - protect the rich and fuck the poor summs up the Tories, no matter how much they claim otherwise

Maybe they should then!

Again, just the principle isn't all bad.

Former Member

The council was right to pull the idea as it would probably cause as much irrational uproar as the simlar idea of helping patients fund private medical care.

It's a good idea but I think the money would be more effectively spent deporting disruptive and or violent pupils to the Sahara desert.

Former Member

Where's the news story here? At no point was this seriously being considered.

As for people like Aladdin, who believe that the Tories are baby-eating monsters, you need not fear. Call Me Dave won't dare make the sorts of cuts in public spending this country needs. He is committed to 99.23% of Labour's spending commitments as it is, so things won't change much under the shameless charlatan.

Former Member

Is it such a retarded plan though? The cost of educating a child in the state sector is more than £5000 per year, I understand. Giving a £5000 grant to keep the child out of the state sector seems like good value for money to me.