V.A.T, in school fees

Would having true socialist principles prevent someone from earning a living like that?

I think we're getting into really tricky waters here. If the choice were between a morally questionable money earning occupation and starvation what would you do?

I am certainly in the very low income group, I pay for my youngest grandchild to have tuition , she sits her A levels this summer and wants to join her sister and brother in Cardiff.

So those children of wealthy parents would get free school meals.

So use the tax system to recoup the 'benefit' they would get from their children getting free school meals.

What difference between teachers in public schools who gain from the wealthy 7% and those who give tuition to children who can afford to pay in full knowledge there are chikdren who cannot have thus tuition
A very good point anniebach

It's difficult to understand how anybody, especially somebody with socialist principles, can justify that
Would having true socialist principles prevent someone from earning a living like that?

I'm not sure why you were demanding answers of me at 11 pm last night daphnedill
The point is that people talk about "middle income" but can't define it
Anyway, I thought that the elderly denied being "well off". How come they can afford to pay for tuition, while their children can't?
You've lost me, I'm afraid.
My DC are grown up and no longer require tuition.

All I had said was that we (and people like us on average incomes) paid for some private tuition for our children many years ago - not that we sent them to private school and that yes, it was a struggle at times.
People we know used the same tutors, people who were on about five times our salary.

The parents of some of my students are extremely wealthy
Some of them already send their children to independent schools - some don't and have made a conscious decision to save on school fees and employ tutors on an 'ad hoc' basis.

So those children of wealthy parents would get free school meals.

What difference between teachers in public schools who gain from the wealthy 7% and those who give tuition to children who can afford to pay in full knowledge there are chikdren who cannot have thus tuition

Children in private schools are not allowed to sit for hours playing computer games, they are not a,lowed to wander to the shops lunch time and buy crisps and chocolate,

Lillie, some time ago there was a big drive to change school childrens diets, healthy eating , mothers stood outside schools with Chips and burgers etc passing them to their children because their children didn't like the new diet .

So Lillie, you know these 7% ?

Yes, Anniebach - I am one of them and Headmistress to boot!

That's what I have been thinking Anniebach. As I look round my independent school there are hardly any obese children to be seen. Admittedly they all take part in the sports and activities we provide and eat the nutritious food in the dining hall. I have a feeling, however, that even if such improvements were made to state schools there may well be some parents who would still prefer their current lifestyles for their children and who would laugh in the face of such frivolities!

So Lillie, you know these 7% ?

Money breads money, and parents paying for a private education want the "value added" extras beyond the education itself.
20 or 30 years ago there were many sole proprietorship schools offering the basics at an affordable cost, but with all the new regulations these have found it impossible to survive. We are now left with the big business independent schools run by bursars and financial experts in the field, and they are just that - businesses.
dj is right that the 7% of the population in private education don't waste a second thinking about the rest. Call it smugness if you like, but they are successful earners and you can't really criticise them for not wanting the very best for their children.

Going back to these children who need these free sschools meals , Thornberry said these children were obese did she not?

I am not sure the alleged 7% do not care about the rest of us, but I don't know that 7% , so wouldn't judge .

Yes, they have wandered far from the OP. I agree.

The point is that people talk about "middle income" but can't define it.

The point is that most people can't define it either and think they are poorer relative to others than they actually are. The chart I posted shows why. The figures have changed, but the shape of the income distribution curve hasn't.

A household income of £50kpa places it firmly within the top quartile. They don't regard themselves as rich, because they know of people earning 6 or 7 figure salaries. Another common misconception is how much people on benefits receive and there was evidence of that earlier on the thread. Some people really seem to think that everybody could afford private school fees, if only they worked hard, prioritised and saved.

The fact is that only households in the wealthiest 10-15% of households can afford private school fees, however hard they work, whether they prioritise or save.

It's also a fact that private schools, free schools and academies have tax advantages which ordinary state schools don't. For example, state schools have to pay business rates on solar panels, but private schools receive an 80% exemption.

Private schools compete against each other to have the best facilities. The standard of teaching isn't significantly better than state schools, but the taxpayer is subsidising better facilities, such as swimming pools and tennis courts, which just aren't available to the majority of pupils. It's difficult to understand how anybody, especially somebody with socialist principles, can justify that.

fullfact.org/economy/income-inequality-resolution-foundation/

As incomes appear to be going to become even more unequal, there will be even fewer able to pay for private education.
However, as that is only 7% of the population, I am sure that 7% do not care about the rest of us, even those who have more than the median.

I honestly don't know what you are expecting in answer to your questions daphnedill which seem to have wandered far from the OP.

No sensible reply? Ah well!

Well it certainly wasn't his millions

Debbie, may I ask what attracted you to Paul?

Just call us Paul and Debbie.

I'm suggesting that a couple with a median income of £440pw, probably paying 50% of net income for housing plus over £1000pa for council tax and bills, food, clothes, transport, etc etc would need to be magicians to afford an additional £100+ per month for private tuition. I think they would be worse off than struggling.

Apologies! That's the 2011 chart. I copied the wrong one, but it really isn't that different from 2014.

So where would you put "middle income" on the chart?

Yes, it was a struggle.