17,000 euros pa to send a Child to Clongowes

alex73 · 04-01-2012 07:04PM #1

17,000 euros a year to send a Child to Clongowes (where O'leary went I believe)

If you can afford it great... I am sure the O'Leary family got a return on their investment.

but the state is also funding the same school!.....

If a family can afford 85,000 euros of 5 years to send their son there then the can afford to pay the full price? (and maybe get tax relief on it ?)

Why should the state have to pay for private schools???

There are a lot of working poor who are paying the new charges, I think the rich with their private schools funded by the state could help.

(Conglowes annual fee income of €7.4 million -- the 450 students)

doc_17 · 04-01-2012 07:09PM

I suppose the arguement that might be made is that the "rich" pay their fair share ( and a lot of other peoples' share as well ) in taxes and if they want to subsidise their own child's education then they are entitled to it.

alex73 · 04-01-2012 07:15PM

doc_17 wrote: »

I suppose the arguement that might be made is that the "rich" pay their fair share ( and a lot of other peoples' share as well ) in taxes and if they want to subsidise their own child's education then they are entitled to it.

OK... Then let them go to state schools and if they want to subsidise the Child's Education well and good.

I agree with your point.. And if we did not have to make cuts it would be fine. .. But don't you think that when having to make a choice between poorer schools and schools who's fees are in excess of 17K that it would be better to target the rich.

You can be sure that the families of the 450 kids in Clongowes wood can afford the extra fees. State could give them a tax rebate at standard rate in leau ?

pebbles21 · 04-01-2012 07:19PM

Im sure Mr O Leary has paid more than his fair share back into the economy since,and if schools like this produce more Mr O Leary's then i don't see a problem tbh...

n900guy · 04-01-2012 07:22PM

alex73 wrote: »

If a family can afford 85,000 euros of 5 years to send their son there then the can afford to pay the full price? (and maybe get tax relief on it ?)

Why should the state have to pay for private schools???

The state funds it the same as it does any school in the state.

And the rich taxpayers who can afford Clongowes' fees are also likely paying for several people to go to regular schools through general taxation. Perhaps you'd like a breakdown of that first? - How many kids from others' families must a rich person pay for first?

This isn't America, we have massive social supports in terms of welfare, schooling and healthcare, all primarily funded by a smaller and smaller group of people. The same illogical thinking will get private patients out of "public" hospitals (you are no longer a member of the taxpaying public if you can afford VHI?) and see those same public hospitals collapse with lack of funding.

moonshadow · 04-01-2012 07:27PM

Which o`Leary..

doc_17 · 04-01-2012 07:43PM

alex73 wrote: »

OK... Then let them go to state schools and if they want to subsidise the Child's Education well and good.

I agree with your point.. And if we did not have to make cuts it would be fine. .. But don't you think that when having to make a choice between poorer schools and schools who's fees are in excess of 17K that it would be better to target the rich.

You can be sure that the families of the 450 kids in Clongowes wood can afford the extra fees. State could give them a tax rebate at standard rate in leau ?

That might actully cost the state more in lost taxes than they would be saving in withdrawing support.

robd · 04-01-2012 07:49PM

The state pays for teachers per pupil just like it does for every other school. Capitation for private schools was removed some years back.

Clongowes is so expensive because it is a boarding school. It would be circa 12-15,000 more than a non boarding private school. I think Belvedere (best comparison as it's Jesuit non boarding) is circa 4500-5000 per year.

Most private schools have scholarship schemes for those in need or those who get into financial difficulty through things such as loss of a parent. So not all students are fee paying.

doc_17 · 04-01-2012 08:08PM

robd wrote: »

The state pays for teachers per pupil just like it does for every other school. Capitation for private schools was removed some years back.

Clongowes is so expensive because it is a boarding school. It would be circa 12-15,000 more than a non boarding private school. I think Belvedere (best comparison as it's Jesuit non boarding) is circa 4500-5000 per year.

Most private schools have scholarship schemes for those in need or those who get into financial difficulty through things such as loss of a parent. So not all students are fee paying.

Unfortunately chidren with special educational/behaviour needs are always under-represented at these schools.

These schools are already operating on an increased PTR so they have been hit harder than non-fee paying schools

juan.kerr · 04-01-2012 08:20PM

If we're going to start this debate again, why should the wealthy pay tax at all above a certain amount e.g. 10k per annum?

amacca · 04-01-2012 08:24PM

juan.kerr wrote: »

If we're going to start this debate again, why should the wealthy pay tax at all above a certain amount e.g. 10k per annum?

Or indeed why shouldn't everyone pay the same percentage of their income in taxes regardless of what they earn?

juan.kerr · 04-01-2012 08:34PM

amacca wrote: »

Or indeed why shouldn't everyone pay the same percentage of their income in taxes regardless of what they earn?

Maybe. I would also suggest the following:

1. There should be no exemptions for any taxes or changes e.g. for water charges, household charge.
2. Everyone should have a medical card.

washman3 · 04-01-2012 08:39PM

pebbles21 wrote: »

Im sure Mr O Leary has paid more than his fair share back into the economy since,and if schools like this produce more Mr O Leary's then i don't see a problem tbh...

it also "produced" some of the "great" minds that put this country in its current mess. it also "produced" some of the biggest thugs in this country, which for obvious reasons i cannot and will not, name here.
dont be deluded man,Clongowes did not "produce" Michael O'Leary.!!
most of his ilk have a natural talent for innovation and would have achieved if they had just a primary education,which many actually did.
In short Clongowes is a little bubble for the elite,scandalously subsidised by the taxpayer, a practice that should be immediately ended.
Let nobody be fooled by this bluff that "the rich pay tax too" and the rich subsidise the poor. this is utter nonsense as its so out of proportion its actually laughable.

juan.kerr · 04-01-2012 08:43PM

washman3 wrote: »

Let nobody be fooled by this bluff that "the rich pay tax too" and the rich subsidise the poor. .

Let the 'poor' pay for the running of the country themselves for a few months and see what happens.

There'll always be begrudgers.

LizT · 04-01-2012 08:47PM

washman3 wrote: »

it also "produced" some of the "great" minds that put this country in its current mess. it also "produced" some of the biggest thugs in this country, which for obvious reasons i cannot and will not, name here.
dont be deluded man,Clongowes did not "produce" Michael O'Leary.!!
most of his ilk have a natural talent for innovation and would have achieved if they had just a primary education,which many actually did.
In short Clongowes is a little bubble for the elite,scandalously subsidised by the taxpayer, a practice that should be immediately ended.
Let nobody be fooled by this bluff that "the rich pay tax too" and the rich subsidise the poor. this is utter nonsense as its so out of proportion its actually laughable.

You post just stinks of reverse snobbery. " A bubble for the elite" - what are your reasons for saying this.

The rich may not directly subsidize the poor but they do contribute more the to state (financially) than say a person earning minimum wage purely because they have to pay a higher rate of tax on their earnings.

washman3 · 04-01-2012 09:08PM

juan.kerr wrote: »

Let the 'poor' pay for the running of the country themselves for a few months and see what happens.

There'll always be begrudgers.

they have been paying for it for the last 3 years since the elite did a runner and will be paying for a generation or two more while the elite are protected by their cronies in power.
there's a programme on RTE1 at 9pm every night called THE NEWS.
you should watch it sometime, you may just learn something.!

or maybe you prefer to live in your cocoon of denial.

amacca · 04-01-2012 09:21PM

juan.kerr wrote: »

Maybe. I would also suggest the following:

1. There should be no exemptions for any taxes or changes e.g. for water charges, household charge.

Household charge agreed....with respect to water charges...it would not be equitable to charge a person who has paid the cost of well to be dug....a pump to be installed and exclusively pays for the ongoing maintenance of this system the same as someone who gets it piped into their house and has none of this outlay and does not have to pay maintenance on an ongoing out of their own pocket

juan.kerr wrote: »

Everyone should have a medical card.

agreed

04-01-2012 09:25PM

My post from the AH thread. Might as well drop it here for the craic.

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not really going to enter into a debate on the subject but I'll just post this.

Each and every secondary school student in the country gets an equal amount of funding towards their education. Some parents choose to supplement this government fee to send their children to a "private" school.

Despite the stereotype often thrown about, not all children in private schools have elitist parents who have mountains of money to throw around. Let's face it, a baby in creche costs a hell of a lot of more than a kid in a fee paying school. Any parents I know that have kids in private schools work very very hard to come up with the money to pay the fees.

So, what happens when the government stops subsidising private secondary schools? Well the parents who can not afford the higher fees will move their children to state schools. The state will now have to build more classrooms to accommodate this influx, thereby costing the taxpayer more money or worse, lowering the education standards further.

As I already mentioned, Primary schools receive no state funding, none. So when the government remove secondary subsidies, not only will they have the influx into secondary schools, but all the kids who are only in private primary schools in order to get them into private secondary schools (which they can no longer afford) will also be moved back into the state system, also either costing the tax payer more money or else, again, lowering the standard of education.

It's not as simple as people like to believe it is.

Spiderman68 · 04-01-2012 09:31PM

The private education debate mirrors health. If all the young things in Clongowes etc landed in on the 'free schools' , the system would simply collapse . Great to have choice. Remember 5% of population pay 50% of our taxes. Likely same people who use private school system. If you can afford 4 Seasons you'd never stay in Holiday Inn again!

juan.kerr · 04-01-2012 09:45PM

amacca wrote: »

....with respect to water charges...it would not be equitable to charge a person who has paid the cost of well to be dug....

Fair point, was thinking of Dublin.

juan.kerr · 04-01-2012 09:48PM

washman3 wrote: »

they have been paying for it for the last 3 years since the elite did a runner and will be paying for a generation or two more while the elite are protected by their cronies in power.
there's a programme on RTE1 at 9pm every night called THE NEWS.
you should watch it sometime, you may just learn something.!
or maybe you prefer to live in your cocoon of denial.

Define 'poor'. I'm not poor but I pay plenty of tax...

Spiderman68 · 04-01-2012 10:16PM

juan.kerr wrote: »

washman3 wrote: »

they have been paying for it for the last 3 years since the elite did a runner and will be paying for a generation or two more while the elite are protected by their cronies in power.
there's a programme on RTE1 at 9pm every night called THE NEWS.
you should watch it sometime, you may just learn something.!
or maybe you prefer to live in your cocoon of denial.

The ' elite did a runner'. Michael O Leary is the single biggest contributor to our revenue take. Such ranting does grave injustice to him and 'the 5%' who contribute so much. See how the welfare state manages if ' the contributors ' did a runner. Time to wake up and see what's really going on. Read the recent IMF report on what it says about our welfare state.

gandalf · 04-01-2012 10:29PM

washman3 wrote: »

they have been paying for it for the last 3 years since the elite did a runner and will be paying for a generation or two more while the elite are protected by their cronies in power.
there's a programme on RTE1 at 9pm every night called THE NEWS.
you should watch it sometime, you may just learn something.!
or maybe you prefer to live in your cocoon of denial.

Can you list who "de elite" are and where they went to school?

A lot of parents who sent their children to fee paying schools do so sacrificing what others take from granted like nights out or additional holidays. I know mine did. They did it because they wanted a good education for their children.

Do you want to remove that choice for people and make it harder for those parents who may not be mega rich but are willing to sacrifice to give their children a potential extra start in life.

byhookorbycrook · 04-01-2012 10:33PM

gandalf wrote: »

A lot of parents who sent their children to fee paying schools do so sacrificing what others take from granted like nights out or additional holidays. I know mine did. They did it because they wanted a good education for their children.

Do you want to remove that choice for people and make it harder for those parents who may not be mega rich but are willing to sacrifice to give their children a potential extra start in life.

But how do you think private education does this better than public?Many teachers in private schools are not fully qualified at all?

gandalf · 04-01-2012 10:42PM

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

But how do you think private education does this better than public?Many teachers in private schools are not fully qualified at all?

It is not guaranteed to do so, it depends on the individual. I wasn't the best academically but what I felt I got from my education was a very well rounded experience.

What I am talking about here is choice, the state guarantees a certain amount for each student. If parents want to pay over and above this then they should have that option.

Have you any stats or source on your comment about many teachers in private schools not being fully qualified?

GarIT · 04-01-2012 10:50PM

If you ask why private schools are state funded, you could also ask why schools run by the catholic church are state funded.

I personally believe that schools should either be state owned, state run and state funded of fully private, I don't think we should have a middle ground at all.

Techanically I am in a private school, the school is catholic church owned and run and we pay a €230 per year regestration fee. Unfortunately if we cut funding to private schools 80+% of our schools could close.

Dob74 · 04-01-2012 11:40PM

n900guy wrote: »

The state funds it the same as it does any school in the state.

And the rich taxpayers who can afford Clongowes' fees are also likely paying for several people to go to regular schools through general taxation. Perhaps you'd like a breakdown of that first? - How many kids from others' families must a rich person pay for first?

This isn't America, we have massive social supports in terms of welfare, schooling and healthcare, all primarily funded by a smaller and smaller group of people. The same illogical thinking will get private patients out of "public" hospitals (you are no longer a member of the taxpaying public if you can afford VHI?) and see those same public hospitals collapse with lack of funding.

Why should the taxpayer pay for private schools that openly discrimate against the majority of the population who cant afford to send there children to these schools.
If a school denied entry because of race there would be up roar but not having enough dough is fine.
Lets set up schools where the well connected can send there kids so they can be well connnected, loan money to each other and not pay it back. When the system fails let the fools who do jobs productive pay for it.

And for the record America has massive social programs social security and medicare. They are much more transparent as well.
We have to listen the likes of IBEC moan about people on the dole. 188 euro a week isn't very much no matter how much spin the indo puts on it. I would rather the nice fat government cheque(funded mainly by semi state bodies) the boys in IBEC get.

washman3 · 04-01-2012 11:52PM

juan.kerr wrote: »

Define 'poor'. I'm not poor but I pay plenty of tax...

then you are exactly like me.!!
i actually repeated the word poor from this and other threads. its being used conveniently now by those trying to defend the subsidy to these schools. read the threads.

Spiderman68 · 04-01-2012 11:55PM

Dob74 wrote: »

n900guy wrote: »

The state funds it the same as it does any school in the state.

Why should the taxpayer pay for private schools that openly discrimate against the majority of the population who cant afford to send there children to these schools.
If a school denied entry because of race there would be up roar but not having enough dough is fine.
Lets set up schools where the well connected can send there kids so they can be well connnected, loan money to each other and not pay it back. When the system fails let the fools who do jobs productive pay for it.

And for the record America has massive social programs social security and medicare. They are much more transparent as well.
We have to listen the likes of IBEC moan about people on the dole. 188 euro a week isn't very much no matter how much spin the indo puts on it. I would rather the nice fat government cheque(funded mainly by semi state bodies) the boys in IBEC get.

I think 'discriminate' is inaccurate . Based on this argument universities discriminate against the less academically gifted, retailers discriminate against those who can't afford their wares. We fought hard for freedom, one of tenets of which is right to choose . There will always be the deluxe models. That doesn't mean everyone is entitled to same. You got to work for that.

washman3 · 05-01-2012 12:09AM

Spiderman68 wrote: »

juan.kerr wrote: »

The ' elite did a runner'. Michael O Leary is the single biggest contributor to our revenue take. Such ranting does grave injustice to him and 'the 5%' who contribute so much. See how the welfare state manages if ' the contributors ' did a runner. Time to wake up and see what's really going on. Read the recent IMF report on what it says about our welfare state.

and i'm actually a huge admirer of MOL. find my posts on other threads if you like. but it sickens me to see him advertised as a "product" of Clongowes. probably by the same people that would be the first to criticise Ryanair and be too overwhelmed by grandeur to fly with them.
i've read the report on our welfare and of course it must be tackled,should have been done long ago,but done fairly.
for example,like grossly reducing the rent allowance. but of course this would mostly hurt the landlords which in turn would affect house prices and in turn hurt the cronies, so its well down the list of priorities.
far easier to take €9 a week from my elderly neighbours blind pension.
Time to wake up for sure,EVERYONE;)

johnnyskeleton · 05-01-2012 12:09AM

I didn't go to no fancy fee paying school and I done got learned good smart.

Etc

I suppose there is a big jump between those schools that aren't fee paying and those which are, and perhaps a little more choice in between would be better

17,000 euros pa to send a Child to Clongowes

Comments