UK Politics
General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
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.
!ukpolitics@lemm.ee appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(
view the rest of the comments
The reasons independents schools don’t pay VAT are historic and multifaceted.
One thing that is conveniently left out of the argument is the fact that every pupil in private education saves the state £7000 per year by not taking a place in state school.
It’s not serious economic policy, but low calibre populism from Starmer because it’s such an emotive issue.
Oddly, I would have accepted this from Corbyn who was sincere in his socialist convictions, but I don’t swallow it from this neo-liberal corporatist rat, because there are plenty of other places to garner surplus that he refuses to look at.
Fair point, would love to see the numbers on this. But it smells of trickle down economics to me. VAT is 20%, I assume this is what will be paid. And lets assume it is on the tuition that parents will now pay. Seems the average tuition paid is around £15k (rounded) for private schools. Which means about a 3k increase in the tuition. That would mean for every 3 students in a private school you could afford to send 1 to public school with room to spare. So to have a negative impact this policy would have to have a what 1 out of every 4 students to drop out of public school and return to private school? Or 25% of students give or take a lot.
But according to the article:
Which is vastly less than 25% which should make this policy a net positive with loads of head room for my math crude back of the napkin attempt.
Thus, smells a lot like trickle down economics argument to me.
Would love to see a more concrete analysis of this.
It won't be anything like a 20% uplift though as the schools will also be able to reclaim vat on purchases which they didn't before. Obviously they are not advertising this point, but I'm surprised the right wing media haven't been shouting about it this, they could just be that lazy though.