hodgy0_2

unforgivable -- especially in a post regarding grammar

bigsinky

1. wgaf = who gives a ****
2. i am not a troll. i am a well respected member of the SN community
3. well spotted hodgy.
4. scotland is still a second rate sh1thole

SunnySideUp

An argument could be made for Taxing them heavily to allow state schools to be brought up to Etons standard!

Remember that Cameron has a personal fortune of £15million - I have no problem with that, except the fact that he cannot possibly, ever, in an eternity, place himself in the shoes of the majority of the UK residents. 'Detached from the common man' takes on a whole new meaning!

cster

Do you really believe it is money that sets standards in schools? I think you're a funny guy.
When it comes to the state school system, let's face it - you can't polish a turd.
As for detatchment from the common man, Davo could find no better exemplar than our aloof PM. A clinical level of detatchment one might say. Plus he is the best man Labour have for the job!
By the way - why is it that you think everyone needs the governments help?
Surely this country isn't so state dependant as that?

hodgy0_2

tbh the sooner Davo gets in and sorts out the price of Parmesan cheese the better

It’s an absolute scandal – it makes crack cocaine seem reasonably priced

Oh and whilst he is at it he should tackle the shameful “trade” in high quality Prosecco

SunnySideUp

As someone who works with the State School system I find that highly insulting.

You are right, money is not the only factor in Educational standards - indeed, Teachers are paid a very handsome amount of money these days.

BUT, the likes of Eton can (and do) attract the finest teachers - with no Eton those Teachers would be teaching in the State sector.

Eton attracts a certain 'type' of pupil, the type who are groomed for it - without Eton they would be in the State system.

Eton has a certain Ethos and Standard - without Eton that standard would be spread amongst the State sector.

Eton attracts huge wealth from those who support it - without Eton that wealth can be used to support State Schools.

Therefore, to abolish Eton would directly improve the Education for many - better Teachers (lets get rid of the poor Teachers within the State Sector) - more funding would be directed to improving the State Sector - the pupils who once would have gone to Eton would now rub shoulders with the common man (thereby making them much better equipt to rule).

Win, Win, Win I think?

cster

You work in the state school system.
I rest my case.
ps. this has got to be one of the most deluded posts I have ever read on SN.
If you really care about the state education system, do everyone a favour and quit your job would be my advice. I am sure they would manage just fine without you.

SunnySideUp

No need to get personally rude .... if you care to read what I wrote I said work WITH the state system ...... not IN it.

97TURBO

Whatever floats you're Boat. You should have that put on a certificate and hung on the wall.

cster

I did notice that, but you took the bait anyway, so -
A small glimmer of hope for the state system then.
Do you really think it needs the class envy that so clearly runs through your posts?
To quote a famous lady
"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent."
Encouraging people to play the victim is such a pointless and negative thing to be doing.
Like I say - move on - they will get on just fine without you.
ps. sorry if you find this personally rude, but the future of our youth takes precedence.

Dingdongler

I couldn't agree more mate, we need to redistribute these 'resources' for the greater good of society. If you are serious about these kind of issue pm me, we could do with people like you. I'm an active member of The New Revolutionary UK Communist Party, and we need more forward thinking people like you on board.

cster

Can I join to?
If you hum it - I reckon I can sing along!

Leslie

There is a lot of truth in that post.

I was dragged up to a very good school from a very poor background by virtue of the 11 plus exams which were instituted by Old Labour. In those days politicians were far more honest and actually worked for the good of the electorate in general rather than largely themselves. Those who were prepared to work at improving their lot were encouraged.

The present way of NL PC plonking style thinking is that no one must be able to improve himself beyond the abilities of his fellows so we must all remain a grey equal society. People just are not like that basically, some are better in certain directions, others in a different kind of mould. It is very foolish to restrict those who can excel in their own way.

I had a lot of time for Old Labour in the days when politicians were trustworthy and honest people. NL is the very antithesis of that.

Les

Devildog

And you'd be wrong, again, Pete. It would be fair to say that Glasgow east voters, on the whole, are far from smart. They vote labour because that's what they do. THis is not an intelligent demograph that gives consideration to policy. Most won't have been affected by the economic crisis as most won't be working anyway.

Have you been to the area in question? Or are you simply making up the story to fit the basic facts?

Funny that your opening post (?) after a ban is back to the same political pish that you just can't stay away from.

Labour were expected to win, by everone including the SNP.

SunnySideUp

That's a scathing attack on the people of Glasgow, yes I have been to the area - we have a base close by.

SNP were shocked that they didn't take the seat - or even come close.

My ban was overturned, I visit when I choose to and post what I consider suitable - the facts are as I stated. You may not like those facts, and may wish to silence anyone who states them - but that doesn't make you right.

hodgy0_2

Eton is a registered charity

so it is not too fanciful to argue it recieves Tax Breaks

Devildog

No Pete, it's the simple reality of life in the East End, and in that partcular constituency. People there have no more interest in politics than the average politician has in the wellbeing of the people.

Its an era of poor employment, high percentages of social housing, significant benefit receipt, high crime and a lack of social responsibility. Until recently, I've lived and worked in and around Glasgow most of my adult life, and can pretty much guarantee I understand its workings better than someone who vists for work occasionally

Answer me this - who says the SNP were "shocked" they didn't take the seat??

Disappointed yes, but certainly not shocked.

How about direct comment, rather than some rubbish from the media?

Speaking at a press conference in Glasgow following the result of the Glasgow North East by-election SNP Depute Leader and Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon said:
“The SNP campaign did achieve our best Westminster result in Glasgow North East for 35 years, and David Kerr’s positive campaign made progress in Labour’s safest seat in Scotland. But we were clearly disappointed by the result, and one early lesson from this by-election is clear.
“We absolutely must now take Labour’s negative campaigning and misrepresentations head on.
"I wish Mr Bain well as the new MP, but the low turnout shows that it was not a positive vote for Labour, rather a decision to stick with the status quo following Labour’s relentlessly negative campaign.

The facts are very much not as you stated. You merely spouted more nonsense from something you probably read in an English newspaper.

cster

How much tax break do they get - I heard it was worth £150 a year per student.
Is that about right?
I know that in Australia the government provides somewhat more substantial funding to private schools - I guess in order to promote parental choice.
Australia does however tend to have a more self reliant ethos than we have here though IMO.
I would imagine if such a proposal were made here, it would be howled down.

Dingdongler

All fee paying schools have charitable status, so have some tax advantages. Labour has threatened to take away this charitable status unless the schools agree to open up their facilities to the local state schools.
About 10% of pupils go to a fee paying school, so in a way they are helping the state sector by them only having to fund 9/10 pupils. But thats not enough of a reason for us to encourage their elitism.

Lets force them to open their facilities to the local state schools, I mean why should they succeed and enjoy an enviroment that nutures learning unless EVERY last child in the country can't have exactly the same?
The only way we can have a fair society is if EVERYBODY has exactly the same, if that means bringing down a section of the population to a lower level then so be it.


Its the only way this country can go forward and succeed in this new globalised world

It is slightly strange though that iirc the only prime minister in the last 25 years or so who wasn't privately educated was a Conservative one, can't remember which one.

hodgy0_2

without extensive research I would say John Major

The independent school sector as a whole recieves in the region of £100 million of tax benefits -- not a fortune in the grand scheme of things

but still a fair amount of money

SunnySideUp

20,595 of them turned out, on a November day, to prove otherwise.

If anyone believed what you say about these people I am surprised that they were able to find the Polling Station!

Nah, they care and they voted.

Just because you don't like who they voted for doesn't make them some form of low-life.

I hope you are ashamed of yourself.

cster

You seem to have a lot of figures to hand!
I can't seem to find them where-ever I look.
How much roughly do you think the independant school sector saves the taxpayer by way of reducing the number of students dependant on the state for their education?

Devildog

LOL

That's rich comming from you

You are completely missing the point. Who they voted for doesn't change anything. You are focusing on my opinions of a section of Glasgow society to detract from answering the real question put to you.

Who said the SNP where shocked?

In terms of the raw numbers:

Labour won with 12,231 votes - a majority of 8,111 - while the SNP came second with 4,120 votes. No doubt assisted by Eddie Izzard.

The Tories came third with 1,075 votes, and the BNP was fourth with 1,013 votes. The Lib Dems came sixth.

Voter turnout, at 32.97%, was a record low for a Scottish by-election

So over 2/3 of the voting populace for that area couldn't be arsed. That's over 40,000 people.

Of those that did, 1 in 20 voted BNP. And we know how upstanding the BNP support is, don't we.

If you want to keep playing, that's fine by me, but lets see you put your money where your mouth is and stop ducking the point that it was nothing other than as expected (irrespective of what the press say)

Incidentally, my views may be harsh but this sums it up perfectly:

"The electorate of North-East Glasgow is not in any way typical of voters in Britain, or even in Scotland. The constituency still shows a shockingly high incidence of social deprivation, low pay, poverty and ill health"

hodgy0_2

Yes, that is an argument trotted out about private schools and private healthcare re saving the state money – which, incidentally, is always presented by people with a vested interest them

But I am not that bothered either way really

I think it is undeniable that if you can afford private schooling you give your children a better start in life, - is that fair? Who knows, but I don’t loose too much sleep over it

My children (I have 5) go to state schools, the secondary school regularly out performs (or matches) local private schools and gets a significant percentage to Oxford and Cambridge.

I am fully aware of the benefits of a private education, my older brother went to St Pauls School in Barns – which often tops the league tables, my younger sister went to Godolphin and Latymer School, and my wife went to Francis Holland School in Bakers Street.

But ultimately I believe, that in life, if you get the basics right i.e. politeness, enthusiasm, empathy for others and a smile, and you are good enough, and work hard you will get on. Full stop

That’s why my children never hear me whinge about scroungers and immigrants etc etc – as you will always get hangers on in life, but I try and lift myself and my children from life’s lowest common denominators.

(which incedently does beg the question why am I on scoobynet) ;-)

What amazes and depresses me is that whenever our local primary school has a fundraising event – quiz night, auction of promises etc etc it is always the same parents supporting it year in year out, the same parents presenting the evening, the same parents manning the stalls and putting away the tables at the end of the night – I wonder who’s children will get on in life.

cster

Are you trying to say you don't know?
I'm not interested in your political views per se, although I am guessing you do know the answer.
As members of society, are we not all vested interests?
You seem to rate schools on how they "perform". League tables? I do not find it credible you really believe in that ****.
Bit too much like the old party line to me.

I don't send my children to private school, but I do come from a background where education is considered very important.
I am not envious of people who pay for their childrens education (may be a little guilty for not doing it myself).
What I completely fail to understand is why anybody thinks that an institution that is non profit making and is basically a school should not be considered a charity for tax purposes. I understand some of them even offer scholarships, but that is neither here nor there.
Why do many people think that the state is the best provider of the most important aspect in the lives of our most important resource?
Do they think that education and/or our children are simply not worth it?
Do they think that if there were no alternatives to state education, that the state education system would somehow improve? (some probably do )
What does that say about this country?
I just don't get it.
Maybe that is a dogmatic position on my part.

hodgy0_2

I am not sure I understand your position re the tax status of schools, based on the two quotes above

regarding the fact that you feel guilty about your children’s education -- send them to a better state school or pay for them to go private – simple

I also fail to see where you think my post was political

cster

Last bit first - you chose not to answer my question which was basically, how much does a state education cost. As I say though, it is neither here nor there. (Well I still am a bit curious)

Second bit - I can't send them to a private school, because there are none around here.
The nearest is about twelve miles away and has an entrance exam.
I would never consider the boarding option.
Quite simply, I don't have the choice.
One of them goes to a grammar school and that is OK for her as she is academically minded.
The other is not and it would be nice to have a choice.
State schools obsessed with hitting government targets and doing well in league tables are pretty pointless for many (if not indeed most) school pupils. I would be quite surprised if you didn't hold this view yourself.

First bit - quote one sentence alludes to the idea in the second sentence -
"WTF are you on about? Tax breaks? It is like a leech helping out it's host by having a day off sucking blood".
It was made in reply to the OP and was meant more a note on taxation rather than the finance of education.
Lets face it, the £150 a year is only worthy of mention from the point of noting that there are those who oppose it. Why - I don't know - the class ridden nature of British society perhaps?
I would have thought any right minded (educated) person would encourage a bit of competition in the provision of education.
As you have mentioned - there are vested interests, the largest of those being the state.
I think it's a great shame.

hodgy0_2

you're right I didn't -- because I don't know, I understand the argument, but I am not really qualified to answer it.

But I suspect, like much in life, it is not simply a matter of comparing numbers on a spreadsheet.

I too, am not obsessed with "targets" in education; I simply want to give my children the best education (inside and outside school) I can. I fully hope and expect them to reach their individual potential -- and if I am honest this includes places at Oxford or Cambridge University.

That is/was a major factor in our decision to move to the environs of Cambridge, an area which has education at its very heart.

cster

Sounds like a good move to me