|
Post by Clinton Cool on Apr 20, 2024 12:33:48 GMT
Your maths isn't very good is it...
75% will be paying an extra 20% on a large fee (maybe £30k or more)
25% will now be educated by the state (at a cost of £7,690 for secondary education)
Now lets say there are currently 100,000 in private education all paying 30k a year.
Vat receipts = 75000 x 30k x 20% = £450000000
Cost of educating 25000 by the state = 25000 x £7690 = £192250000
Net result = £257750000 or £275 million per year to improve state education.
The average cost of private education is £20K. Not £30K. You haven't included costs of the additional infrastructure requirements for the increased number of state students.
|
|
|
Post by fi on Apr 20, 2024 12:35:41 GMT
I'm not doing the maths again! I got a headache the first time around...!
|
|
|
Post by fi on Apr 20, 2024 12:53:55 GMT
Your maths isn't very good is it...
75% will be paying an extra 20% on a large fee (maybe £30k or more)
25% will now be educated by the state (at a cost of £7,690 for secondary education)
Now lets say there are currently 100,000 in private education all paying 30k a year.
Vat receipts = 75000 x 30k x 20% = £450000000
Cost of educating 25000 by the state = 25000 x £7690 = £192250000
Net result = £257750000 or £275 million per year to improve state education.
The average cost of private education is £20K. Not £30K. You haven't included costs of the additional infrastructure requirements for the increased number of state students. In reply to your edit, I did in my reply to Mr Berg's post about teaching kids in the bike sheds.
However I think I've done sufficient to show that over a period of a few years the policy will be cost neutral rather than costing the state more. And after that would be cost beneficial. I'll leave others to decide whether it is a good policy or not in terms of society.
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Apr 20, 2024 13:06:07 GMT
The average cost of private education is £20K. Not £30K. You haven't included costs of the additional infrastructure requirements for the increased number of state students. In reply to your edit, I did in my reply to Mr Berg's post about teaching kids in the bike sheds.
However I think I've done sufficient to show that over a period of a few years the policy will be cost neutral rather than costing the state more. And after that would be cost beneficial. I'll leave others to decide whether it is a good policy or not in terms of society.
I think you're right, not much in it either way. Labour claim it will raise significant revenues. Labour's 'fully costed' plans are always dodgy.
|
|
|
Post by fi on Apr 20, 2024 13:17:01 GMT
In reply to your edit, I did in my reply to Mr Berg's post about teaching kids in the bike sheds.
However I think I've done sufficient to show that over a period of a few years the policy will be cost neutral rather than costing the state more. And after that would be cost beneficial. I'll leave others to decide whether it is a good policy or not in terms of society.
I think you're right, not much in it either way. Labour claim it will raise significant revenues. Labour's 'fully costed' plans are always dodgy. It will raise revenues to be spent on schools. Fully costed over the parliaments lifetime.
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Apr 20, 2024 14:29:04 GMT
I think you're right, not much in it either way. Labour claim it will raise significant revenues. Labour's 'fully costed' plans are always dodgy. It will raise revenues to be spent on schools. Fully costed over the parliaments lifetime. Earlier you suggested it would be cost neutral, in the medium term?
|
|
|
Post by fi on Apr 20, 2024 17:31:15 GMT
I might have picked the wrong words, does 'Labour's first term' fit better.
|
|
|
Post by Andyberg on Apr 20, 2024 19:28:47 GMT
Ultimately Labour supporters just want to raise taxes on the ‘better off’, even when the tax take is shown to be a no win!🙄
In this case, its the kids in state schools who are ultimately going to suffer, but typically, Labour aren't bothered about state school kids situation, as long as some (the least rich😩) private school kids suffer.🙄
Its just ‘Envy tax’, nothing more, nothing less! 🙄🙄
|
|
|
Post by Aloysius on Apr 20, 2024 19:39:16 GMT
I'm not doing the maths again! I got a headache the first time around...! math
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Apr 20, 2024 19:40:33 GMT
A question for the socialists on here. Which do you think is better:
a/ The entire population being equally poor.
b/ Half the population being poor (as above), the other half being rich.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Apr 20, 2024 19:49:45 GMT
I'm not doing the maths again! I got a headache the first time around...! math Are you American?
|
|
|
Post by Aloysius on Apr 20, 2024 19:57:37 GMT
Are you suggesting that the term 'math' in the singular is an Americanism?
|
|
|
Post by Trina on Apr 20, 2024 19:58:26 GMT
Maths is English,math is American as Vince says.35 years teaching maths not math !
|
|
|
Post by Aloysius on Apr 20, 2024 20:01:01 GMT
Math is the senior term.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Apr 20, 2024 20:02:45 GMT
Are you suggesting that the term 'math' in the singular is an Americanism? Yes. It's short for "mathematics". "How to use math and maths. The only difference between math and maths is where they're used. Math is the preferred term in the United States and Canada. Maths is the preferred term in the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, and other English-speaking places". www.thesaurus.com/e/grammar/math-vs-maths/#:~:text=How%20to%20use%20math%20and,and%20other%20English%2Dspeaking%20places.
|
|