David Cobb

Hard to take a lesson in finance from an anonymous lefty with the tag Lazy Tit.

Despite the spin of the Grauniad article, the selective data actually confirms a big shift.

8k for every pupil, at least double for SEND, and Labour hasn’t factored recoverable VAT that private schools can backdate.

Massively reduced bursary availability.

Not simple.

GPT says a 50-80% relative increase.

I’m not saying this is wrong as a society, but let’s be honest about what is happening.

We have a demand problem and we need to decide what we can and can’t afford.

Data?

Me?

Right… 🙄

Nope, I’m saying that tax receipts are a balancing act.

Why do you keep putting words in my mouth?

Try to be less certain. Engage in interesting debate. Read a bit more.

I think it’s a good strategy for you.

The policy will not raise that money.

Whatever it does make will not make it to school budgets. Neither will it pay for new teachers. That’s just naive.

You have no idea what I contribute to society.

Btw, they’re definitely not in the top 10%.

I know a family. Both parents work. Two up, two down. When Grandma stays (for months, siblings alternate), the only child kips on the couch. No holidays. They prioritise education. It’s their choice. They’ve put their boy through prep.

They’ve now been priced out. No bursaries available.

Disposable income is important because it encourages savings and investment in things like homes, pensions, jobs and, yes, education, which are all vital for growth.

Growth and prosperity enable us to look after the less fortunate in society.

Disposable income is post-tax.

If you want, argue for higher income tax. But tax is a negotiation with the people. Bigger tax receipts are the goal, not bigger %s.

You have to be careful not to bite the hand that feeds you.

That’s why Labour has a £4bn tax receipt deficit.

They still pay for state education though they don’t draw down. That’s a choice.

Your analogy makes no sense.

Massively wrong.

You need to disenthrall yourself from your Eton fixation. Not easy, I know, because Labour has been peddling it hard.

Nope. It’s definitely for taxing inheritance.

I am a supporter of the redistribution of wealth, especially from the over 65s, who are the wealthiest generation in history.

This tax on education is unfair on working families, unprecedented and untested. But, most importantly, it doesn’t do the job.

Inheritance tax is for taxing inheritance. Not schooling.

Tell me how they contribute less.

The point is to put a cap on elitism, but mainly to increase dramatically the per pupil funding in state?

That is what you want, no? Levelling up?

Or do you want levelling down?

Is it not enough that the better off contribute voluntarily?

Or do you need them to be ‘forced’ to contribute?

Why should university be free?

It’s independent ✅
It’s self-funded ✅
It’s selective ✅
It delivers advantage to those who pay ✅
It’s elitist ✅ (way, way more so than any independent school bar a literal handful)

The top 10% of working people? So, definitely not the super rich, then?

Don’t hide behind the ‘tax the billionaires’ narrative if you’re actually just envious of Mr and Mrs BMW down the road.

State schools will not get more per pupil funding as a result of this policy.

You are assessing schooling as a luxury? Why, then, does the rest of the developed world disagree?

What about university education? A luxury?

Private healthcare?

SEND EHCPs don’t begin to cover the needs of most children, and nor should they. But the choice to protect your child has now gone.

Good to be on a platform where genuine civil debate is possible 👍

We have made the decision to afford it. Other parents haven’t been able to.

I totally agree.

The very wealthy (assets >£10m) should be subject to a long-term distribution of wealth to the state to fund infrastructure and social security.

This policy doesn’t do that. It just increases middle class debt and pressure, which further feeds the asset class, growing inequality.

You’re conflating the super rich with the middle class. That’s snobbery.

Do you pay VAT on education?

No, you don’t. And nor does anyone else in the developed world.

This is an exceptional punishment tax.

I’m a Y6 parent and I can tell you that kids who registered for their local secondary state school (500yds from home) back in October have been overlooked for a place because they are coming from an independent primary. They’ve been priced out, now punished.

How big is the rise in disability diagnosis as a % of working age people over, say, the last 20 years?

I’m neither right wing nor press.

Taxing education is a scandal. This is not a fiscal policy, it’s purely ideological. Articles like this are misleading people. The true numbers will not be seen until September, at which point a huge amount of damage will have been inflicted.

But the obstacle is not funding, or quality of provision, or tax.

The obstacle is an ideology which cannot accept that successful people can afford to buy better education, better homes, better healthcare, or better holidays.

I’m not sure where or even if that envy has a limit.

Consider this: If PS fees were capped at £12k pa, it’s feasible we could achieve 25% of parents opting for it, rather than 7%.

This would raise per pupil funding in state school to over £11k pa, closing the gap in quality of provision.

Working parents that pay for private education are middle class. They are super tax payers and a double win for state education.

Taxing the rich is about the redistribution of wealth from asset-rich that pay little tax as a % and charge the nation interest.