Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
Guest MattP

The Politics Thread

By Guest MattP, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

Spiritwalker

Spiritwalker

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

How would VAT on private school fees effect people? Genuine question. Any posh cvnts on here who pay for their sprogs to be taught times tables? Maybe they're on the Tigers forum if there is such a thing.

I think this is a great idea, just the type of policy Corbyn should be pursuing.

It would be popular and in the long term it would be very beneficial for the nation's

health. Not too sure if the sums would add up and I'm sure there would be some

resistance from those who would be paying for it.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Finnegan

Finnegan

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, Watson said:

 

I did pretty well, I lasted at least thirty five seconds before suffering such severe embarrassment by proxy I had to turn it off.

 

The woman with a mic, who, by the way, probably doesn't need a mic to talk to a guy five feet away when there's about three of you protesting and no crowd, is just awful.

 

I don't know anything about them or if they have a point, I just know she's an awful, awful human being.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Countryfox

Countryfox

Posted
Posted

 I see my mate JC has condemned the actions of the USA ....     Would love him to go over to Syria and explain to the parents of a child who has been horrifically killed with a worldwide banned nerve gas how he came to this decision. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Benguin

Benguin

Posted
Posted
On ‎06‎/‎04‎/‎2017 at 13:10, Sharpe's Fox said:

How would VAT on private school fees effect people? Genuine question. Any posh cvnts on here who pay for their sprogs to be taught times tables? Maybe they're on the Tigers forum if there is such a thing.

"posh cvnts" pay tax for public schooling despite their kids not attending.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Benguin

Benguin

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Watson said:

Plenty of people pay tax for stuff they never use. What's your point?

"posh cvnts" pay for their kids to have private education and pay for other kids to have public schooling, where's the sense in taxing them more?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Countryfox said:

 I see my mate JC has condemned the actions of the USA ....     Would love him to go over to Syria and explain to the parents of a child who has been horrifically killed with a worldwide banned nerve gas how he came to this decision. 

 
 

If he's smart, he'd say two things to that parent:

 

- That the personal, while almost always tragic, isn't always the same as important; this isn't even the biggest humanitarian nastiness that's happening right now.

- And that the US taking this action isn't going to stop Assad nor his Russian backers from doing what they want, except maybe for a little time.

 

(And then he'll probably get punched in the face by the aforementioned parent. :ph34r:)

 

The point is though...JC has done a veritable plethora of stupid stuff since becoming Labour leader. Calling out the US for engaging in unilateral and likely meaningless tossing off of a few Tomahawks is not one of them, I don't think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sharpe's Fox

Sharpe's Fox

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, Benguin said:

"posh cvnts" pay for their kids to have private education and pay for other kids to have public schooling, where's the sense in taxing them more?

They could put their children through public schooling if they want to. The welfare state is there to provide for those children should they take the option, after all. They choose to put the child through the non-essential service of a private school so should pay VAT on that service like many others. In my opinion the same should be done for private healthcare.

 

EDIT; just thinking on that I wouldn't charge VAT on private education or healthcare services not currently provided by that state such as schools for the severely disabled or niche cancer treatments 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Benguin

Benguin

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

They could put their children through public schooling if they want to. The welfare state is there to provide for those children should they take the option, after all. They choose to put the child through the non-essential service of a private school so should pay VAT on that service like many others. In my opinion the same should be done for private healthcare.

Them not using the services provided for them for free, hence costing the state less, is the tax. It's so naïve to think the way to improve an economy is adding more taxes for rich people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Innovindil

Innovindil

Posted
Posted
Just now, Benguin said:

Them not using the services provided for them for free, hence costing the state less, is the tax. It's so naïve to think the way to improve an economy is adding more taxes for rich people.

It wouldn't even be that bad if it was just rich parents that would pay it. Plenty of people send their kids to private schools even if they struggle to afford it. If you raise the taxes and they can no longer afford private school for those kids you are hurting yourself twice, losing the money they pay in AND having to pay for a public spot for them. 

 

I'm all for taxing the rich more, but this is a ridiculous way to go about it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sharpe's Fox

Sharpe's Fox

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Benguin said:

Them not using the services provided for them for free, hence costing the state less, is the tax. It's so naïve to think the way to improve an economy is adding more taxes for rich people.

To think that parents put their children through private schools beacuse of some sort of civic duty to save the state money is an argument that has no base in any reality.

 

The policy isn't to improve the economy; it's to improve the attainment, welfare and nutrition of state educated children.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Benguin

Benguin

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

To think that parents put their children through private schools beacuse of some sort of civic duty to save the state money is an argument that has no base in any reality.

 

The policy isn't to improve the economy; it's to improve the attainment, welfare and nutrition of state educated children.

No they put their children through private schools because they are financially able to do so and would prefer their children to be educated there. The fact that they cost the state less is no civic duty, it's just a fact.

 

Obviously the policy isn't to improve the economy, it's the opposite. Rich people are smart, once the state starts to bleed them dry they'll move. And as Innovindil says, a lot of privately educated folk are from relatively working class families. I know a few people who attended Loughborough grammar and if the state added vat I doubt their families would have been able to justify the cost anymore. Less people attending private schools means they lose out on the tax they tried to gain and furthermore now have more pupils to educate in public schools.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sharpe's Fox

Sharpe's Fox

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Benguin said:

No they put their children through private schools because they are financially able to do so and would prefer their children to be educated there. The fact that they cost the state less is no civic duty, it's just a fact.

 

Obviously the policy isn't to improve the economy, it's the opposite. Rich people are smart, once the state starts to bleed them dry they'll move. And as Innovindil says, a lot of privately educated folk are from relatively working class families. I know a few people who attended Loughborough grammar and if the state added vat I doubt their families would have been able to justify the cost anymore. Less people attending private schools means they lose out on the tax they tried to gain and furthermore now have more pupils to educate in public schools.

Working class is a stretch. I doubt these people's only assets are their labour if they're paying ten grand or whatever for the privilege. I also doubt they'd do something so simple as pack the bags and move away from the country and work that have supplied that income stream for them in the first place. It seems a drastic measure. It would certainly price some families out of the system. Whether the private schools profit margins would fall such as amount that that also becomes unsustainable  for them is also factor, how would they respond if their service was less attainable? Cut the price? Do a BOGOF deal? You're definitely right thats it's never black and white.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Strokes

Strokes

Posted
Posted

I see no good reason why private schooling should be exempt from VAT. Whilst we are asking everyone to tighten their belts (reducing public spending), we should be trying to get a bit more in from those that can afford luxuries that are out of reach to the many.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Countryfox

Countryfox

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

Calling out the US for engaging in unilateral and likely meaningless tossing off of a few Tomahawks is not one of them, I don't think.

 

Not so sure about that ....    I think that like all bully leaders Assad will maybe think twice before gassing a few children (before last week he probably thought he could literally get away with murder) ...   that pumped up pr1ck Putin might blink a few times ...   and that ridiculously ugly midget in North Korea might think twice too.      Either way Mac if it only saves the lives of a few children from nerve gas or barrel bombs thats good enough for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Countryfox said:

 

Not so sure about that ....    I think that like all bully leaders Assad will maybe think twice before gassing a few children (before last week he probably thought he could literally get away with murder) ...   that pumped up pr1ck Putin might blink a few times ...   and that ridiculously ugly midget in North Korea might think twice too.      Either way Mac if it only saves the lives of a few children from nerve gas or barrel bombs thats good enough for me.

 

Evidently we disagree then. I don't think this will cause Assad to pause for much more than a moment (though he might stop using chemical weapons if that's indeed proven that he did) when it comes to brutally cracking down on the populace he controls. It certainly won't cause Putin or Kim any pause for thought as they have the capability to escalate things to a level that would hurt (not that the US wouldn't probably win against either).

 

If it does save the lives of future Syrian kids, that's great and I'll be glad to be wrong. But right now, I remain unconvinced that it will and IMO it's a purely political gesture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...