Kierannq said..
my daughter goes to private school, we pay the top amount due to my income, we get nothing back from anyone or any govt dept.

You may not "get" anything back in your pocket, but our taxes are subsidising your choices.

Even when private schools are building equestrian centres, rowing complexes and heated indoor swimming pools and posting net profit after tax, we are still subsidising them.

In fact, some of the richest schools in Australia like Haileybury and Geelong Grammar post some of the healthiest bank balances even after massive and lavish capital works projects.

I think it's disgusting and we should revert to the UK model. You choose to go private - you pay 100%.

If you choose to drive a car instead of public transport, you pay 100%. It should be the same with a private education choice.

Just to be clear the extra facilities enjoyed by some private schools are not taxpayer funded.

They are either donated by old boys (giving back to the school) or the result of tireless fundraising by parents on P&F committees. Some of the private schools in QLD with the best facilities are also servicing some pretty big loans with constant fundraising. I wouldn't have thought there was anything stopping the state school P&f's from fund raising to provide extra facilities.

I think Australian children should be funded dollar for dollar by the government for education.

If the government were to stop funding private schools their fees would go up significantly resulting in a mass exiting of kids from private schools to the state system which simply couldn't cope.

If you want a shock have a look at the sums of money bequeathed to tier 1 universities.

Left school at 14.



Rhodes scholar.

evlPanda said...

Main said..
I wouldn't have thought there was anything stopping the state school P&f's from fund raising to provide extra facilities.

True true. Why don't the parents stop being so poor?

To be fair it might be because they live in poor suburbs, which begs the question why not just move to a richer suburb?! Like, why would you chose to live in a townhouse for example?

State school parents are too poor to fundraise !?!?
What a crock...

Cal said..

State school parents are too poor to fundraise !?!?
What a crock...

Yes and no, as a crude generalisation government schools dont have a rich community to raise funds from. Nor do they have developed and prestigious 'old boys clubs' etc and government schools cant register as charities therebye complicating donations that may be swayed by tax free status. All that said, all government schools fundraise to an extent.

yes they do by charging $80 for a school shirt,$15 for socks ,$another $80 for shorts...Then the uniform has been changed three time in the last four years... I could not believe my eyes. I think a uniform is great,it brings a culture for a school. The school I went to we were proud to wear ours. This is just trying to squeeze the poor kids out and help their cause to be lifted to a select school. So from my understanding of what this school is saying,is that poor kids are dumb

Cal said..
Clearly your unhappy with a specific situation crispy, sorry to hear that and I hope your analysis isnt completely accurate. I also hope that isnt indicative of the normal happenings at any scale, local or nationally.

I just don't agree when I see some of my groms mates being told to go home because they have last years uniform as they cannot afford this years. They are polite and great kids. Kids im glad my son can call a friend.

So a class war begins and children are made to feel uncomfortable. Uniforms are supposed to make children become equals...but come on $80 for a shirt,ffs sake I would want it to be Egyptian cotton for that price.

chrispy said..

flanagaj said..
Holy sh!t. I stirred a hornets nest with that post!

private schools and tax breaks...you are unemployed and about to exit the country. something smells

I am not in the country. That's the problem. Still here in London

Cal said...

State school parents are too poor to fundraise !?!?
What a crock...

Yes and no, as a crude generalisation government schools dont have a rich community to raise funds from. Nor do they have developed and prestigious 'old boys clubs' etc and government schools cant register as charities therebye complicating donations that may be swayed by tax free status. All that said, all government schools fundraise to an extent.

Funnily enough the richest are often the hardest to get to donate. One bloke in particular who brags he has US$1B sitting in cash offshore is so stingey he's embarrassing. and some of the most generous are middle class working mums and dads who want their kids to get the best facilities.

^^ Irrespective of all the problems that will cause?

No

The fees in private schools would double and people would leave them in their droves.

The state schools would be overflowing and the private schools would be half empty.

Main said..
No

The fees in private schools would double and people would leave them in their droves.

The state schools would be overflowing and the private schools would be half empty.

How could the state schools be overflowing? With all that money coming in, they would expand and perhaps get bigger locations. With bigger local schools you get more teachers and more subjects, and more economies of scale.

They don't just start gold plating the toilet cubicles. They build bigger schools, get demountables in as a temporary measure, employ more teachers, get a better range of subjects.

As a net result, the quality of teaching available in state schools would get better. There would still be crap teachers and crap students, but these would be at the lower level, so anyone striving for results is not going to see them.

Is it a bad thing if people leave private schools in droves? Why? Why should anyone care if they are half empty? FWIW you can't really have both. If the private schools are increasing their fees, AND are half empty, they will either reduce their fees to what the market will pay, or they will reduce their size. (They even teach Economics in State schools!)

From what I see, people go there because they are scared of state schools and see no alternative. If the state schools get better funding, then they will be better.

tmurray said...
God out of the equation.

Not with the Libs forcing chaplains on any school just wanting to offer some councelling.

Main said..
That funding is an operational expense. ie to run the schools.

The capital cost to buy more land and build more classrooms needs to be factored in.

I think you'd be surprised how many people make large sacrifices to send their kids to an elite private school. I know many!! If the fees were to go up 50% they'd have to move

not if they the private schools folded. the land alone is worth billions. So it will not happen....

as I said previously , you know the 50% that would not pay ,well I went to the school where the parents of the other 50% would take up the slack....oh and they would be so very happy.

I send my kids to private school five of them its been a struggle to afford it and its just the local catholic school in a low socio economic area of logan in Brisbane hardly an elite school.

Some of the comments about rich people exploiting state money at the expense of the poor give me the craps. First I contribute tax the same as anyone else why should my kids be denied their share of government funding for their education .
Second if i took them out of private and put them in public it would save me about 15k a year but probably cost the government an similar amount. How would that help the country or kids in public school. All it would do is make the existing finite money get spread among more kids meaning less for all.
Financially I would be better off because I would take more off the government but the really stupid thing is that the lefty ideological would see that as beneficial for the country. I dont understand that thinking. Less money in tje system means less money for all.

Sure i get that but at a private school the goverment contibutes less to my kids education than if they were public.

If we accept that it is the government's responsibility to provide free education I effectively subsidise the government by sending them to a private school.