EUR100m a year government funding goes to Private schools

VinLieger · 12-12-2012 10:50PM

Look this is maybe the third thread on this in as many months, the facts are this saves more money than it costs no matter what way you look at it.
Parents who send their kids to these shools are effectively subsidising the state for their kids education AFTER paying taxes that goes towards their kids education.
Anyone who argues against this needs to understand you arent paying for their kids education they are paying for yours.

steddyeddy · 12-12-2012 10:53PM

VinLieger wrote: »

Look this is maybe the third thread on this in as many months, the facts are this saves more money than it costs no matter what way you look at it.
Parents who send their kids to these shools are effectively subsidising the state for their kids education AFTER paying taxes that goes towards their kids education.
Anyone who argues against this needs to understand you arent paying for their kids education they are paying for yours.

You see the problem I have with other peoples view is that money should never determine quality of education. Only intelligence should do that.

melekalikimaka · 12-12-2012 10:54PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

You see the problem I have with other peoples view is that money should never determine quality of education. Only intelligence should do that.

doesnt work like that in the real world sadly

steddyeddy · 12-12-2012 10:59PM

melekalikimaka wrote: »

doesnt work like that in the real world sadly

Oh but it does in countries like Finland. Also I will say my intelligence superceded economic benifits of most private school kids so sometimes it does work like that here. If more people think like you more people will provide backlash to the idea at university level.

Dyr · 12-12-2012 11:05PM

VinLieger wrote: »

Look this is maybe the third thread on this in as many months, the facts are this saves more money than it costs no matter what way you look at it.
Parents who send their kids to these shools are effectively subsidising the state for their kids education AFTER paying taxes that goes towards their kids education.
Anyone who argues against this needs to understand you arent paying for their kids education they are paying for yours.

I don't have kids. My taxes are paying for some kids to be given more opportunities than other kids based solely on their parents income. My taxes are subsidising inequality and reinforcing a two tier class system. F**ck that.

steddyeddy · 12-12-2012 11:06PM

melekalikimaka wrote: »

doesnt work like that in the real world sadly

To all who wonder why I have a problem with enhancing education prospects for six years of a students life it's because of the above.

Education and academia are always going to be the exclusive right of the intelligent and the intelligent alone in my opinion. For too long

doesnt work like that in the real world sadly

the above has held true in Ireland and I will fight to more intelligent people enter college.

steddyeddy · 12-12-2012 11:08PM

Bambi wrote: »

I don't have kids. My taxes are paying for some kids to be given more opportunities than other kids based solely on their parents income. My taxes are subsidising inequality and reinforcing a two tier class system. F**ck that.

Indeed I can also add Bambi that I have paid severly for the privileged in the amount of extra hours I have spent explaining simple scientific principles to them.

Zab · 12-12-2012 11:14PM

Bambi wrote: »

I don't have kids. My taxes are paying for some kids to be given more opportunities than other kids based solely on their parents income. My taxes are subsidising inequality and reinforcing a two tier class system. F**ck that.

Or, your taxes are educating more kids overall to a higher standard because some parents pay a portion themselves.

steddyeddy · 12-12-2012 11:17PM

Zab wrote: »

Or, your taxes are educating more kids overall to a higher standard because some parents pay a portion themselves.

I dont see any evidence of that Zab. When they get to college I see zero evidence that such pupils are educated to a higher standard. Trained to do better in the leaving cert maybe but not "better educated".

Zab · 12-12-2012 11:23PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

I dont see any evidence of that Zab. When they get to college I see zero evidence that such pupils are educated to a higher standard. Trained to do better in the leaving cert maybe but not "better educated".

What that's possible (and even likely) it's an indictment of our entire approach to school, not to the fee paying system. As such your effort would be misplaced.

steddyeddy · 12-12-2012 11:26PM

Zab wrote: »

What that's possible (and even likely) it's an indictment of our entire approach to school, not to the fee paying system. As such your effort would be misplaced.

Well Zab attitudes like this dont help.

doesnt work like that in the real world sadly

It's an attitude that isn't helping the situation.

Greenmachine · 12-12-2012 11:29PM

Someone said 8k per student in a classroom. So a classroom of 30 costs close to a quarter of a million to run. How is this possible. Just where does all that money go, considering parents are already clothing students, feeding them and paying for their books.

steddyeddy · 12-12-2012 11:35PM

Zab wrote: »

What that's possible (and even likely) it's an indictment of our entire approach to school, not to the fee paying system. As such your effort would be misplaced.

Zab I answered your questions would you (or anyone) answer one for me?

How would you change things so that a college takes in more people from public schools and college entry takes in a wider gene pool?

VinLieger · 12-12-2012 11:38PM

Bambi wrote: »

I don't have kids. My taxes are paying for some kids to be given more opportunities than other kids based solely on their parents income. My taxes are subsidising inequality and reinforcing a two tier class system. F**ck that.

The logic of i dont have kids so i dont wanna pay for education is retarded, and before you argue that thats not what you said i agree, you said you just dont want to pay for a certain set of kids education because their parents are cabable of paying for the other half that would normally fall on the state to pay? Lets just digest that for a moment shall we?

EVERY child in this state has the right to free education paid for by the government who in turn pay for that with your taxes.
These parents have chosen to pay extra money ON TOP of the taxes they are already paying that go towards their kids education, only half of which is being used compared to kids whose parents cant afford to pay extra.

Basically.....No! Your taxes arent subsidising anything, parents who choose to send their kids to these schools are subsidising your taxes that go towards education.

I cant understand peoples inability to accept this fact and the only reason i can fathom is you simply dont like these people and their children who lets be honest have committed no crime except being born into a family that might be slightly more well off than others and you hate them for that?

steddyeddy · 12-12-2012 11:41PM

VinLieger wrote: »

The logic of i dont have kids so i dont wanna pay for education is retarded, and before you argue that thats not what you said i agree, you said you just dont want to pay for a certain set of kids education because their parents are cabable of paying for the other half that would normally fall on the state to pay? Lets just digest that for a moment shall we?

EVERY child in this state has the right to free education paid for by the government who in turn pay for that with your taxes.
These parents have chosen to pay extra money ON TOP of the taxes they are already paying that go towards their kids education, only half of which is being used compared to kids whose parents cant afford to pay extra.

Basically.....No! Your taxes arent subsidising anything, parents who choose to send their kids to these schools are subsidising your taxes that go towards education.

I cant understand peoples inability to accept this fact and the only reason i can fathom is you simply dont like these people and their children who lets be honest have committed no crime except being born into a family that might be slightly more well off than others and you hate them for that?

You dont think all children deserve equal education?

VinLieger · 12-12-2012 11:50PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

You dont think all children deserve equal education?

I do and all children are entitled to it and receive it but why should parents who are cabable of paying for more not be allowed to?
And before you suggest that they should just pay the whole whack, at least half of the parents whose kids are currently in these schools would most likely not be able to afford the extra hike, yes some would but that would just create a much wider division between what would invariably become a completely elite set of schools and the non fee paying ones.

At least currently parents who may not be making stupid money can choose to forgo certain luxuries to afford to send their kids to these schools, if you took away tha 100m grant then this would cease and not only would these kids be immediately transfered into the public system but many of the schools who currently are fee paying would most likely have to shut on top of all that this would very possibly end up costing the state more than the 100m.

How can you honestly argue for all that just to impose some form of "equality"

steddyeddy · 12-12-2012 11:52PM

VinLieger wrote: »

The logic of i dont have kids so i dont wanna pay for education is retarded, and before you argue that thats not what you said i agree, you said you just dont want to pay for a certain set of kids education because their parents are cabable of paying for the other half that would normally fall on the state to pay? Lets just digest that for a moment shall we?

EVERY child in this state has the right to free education paid for by the government who in turn pay for that with your taxes.
These parents have chosen to pay extra money ON TOP of the taxes they are already paying that go towards their kids education, only half of which is being used compared to kids whose parents cant afford to pay extra.

Basically.....No! Your taxes arent subsidising anything, parents who choose to send their kids to these schools are subsidising your taxes that go towards education.

I cant understand peoples inability to accept this fact and the only reason i can fathom is you simply dont like these people and their children who lets be honest have committed no crime except being born into a family that might be slightly more well off than others and you hate them for that?

You really dont see the double standard there? Some children are getting into college over other children who cannot simply becuase of the family both were born into.

LoonyLovegood · 12-12-2012 11:55PM

Greenmachine wrote: »

Someone said 8k per student in a classroom. So a classroom of 30 costs close to a quarter of a million to run. How is this possible. Just where does all that money go, considering parents are already clothing students, feeding them and paying for their books.

Electricity, heat, paper, staff salaries, working on the school building itself.

melekalikimaka · 12-12-2012 11:56PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well Zab attitudes like this dont help.

It's an attitude that isn't helping the situation.

:rolleyes:

Ziphius · 13-12-2012 12:00AM

steddyeddy wrote: »

You dont think all children deserve equal education?

I think more interesting question is: do you?

steddyeddy wrote: »

Education and academia are always going to be the exclusive right of the intelligent and the intelligent alone in my opinion.
.

How is this any different from saying education is the exclusive right of the wealthy?

VinLieger · 13-12-2012 12:04AM

steddyeddy wrote: »

You really dont see the double standard there? Some children are getting into college over other children who cannot simply becuase of the family both were born into.

I do but killing the 100m grant isnt gonna change that, if anything it will make the entire situation worse as schools will likely get less money have more pupils in classes and the entire system will be put under major strain, how about we dont overload the system any more and start just putting more of our taxes into public education and make the system better to begin with instead of just destroying the whole thing for equalities sake.

Also good job ignoring all other points i made in that post

Zab · 13-12-2012 12:06AM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Zab I answered your questions would you (or anyone) answer one for me?

How would you change things so that a college takes in more people from public schools and college entry takes in a wider gene pool?

That would not be a primary goal of mine, given how we rank in that department. Instead I would look at our general teaching methodology and syllabus across the board. I would most likely divert funds to particularly disadvantaged schools but I'd have to see figures I don't have access to to decide that.

dotsman · 13-12-2012 12:28AM

Bambi wrote: »

I don't have kids. My taxes are paying for some kids to be given more opportunities than other kids based solely on their parents income. My taxes are subsidising inequality and reinforcing a two tier class system. F**ck that.

I really have to stop reading this thread. My head hurts from the amount of times I have banged off my desk reading things like this.

YOUR TAXES ARE BEING SPENT ON ALL KIDS EQUALLY!!!

SOME PARENTS CHOOSE TO SPEND A PORTION OF THEIR HARD-EARNED, AFTER-TAX INCOME ON SUBSIDISING THEIR CHILDREN'S SCHOOL, IN THE BELIEF/HOPE OF BETTERING THE EDUCATION PROVIDED. IN DOING SO, THEY ALSO END UP SPENDING THEIR AFTER-TAX INCOME ON OTHER PEOPLE'S KIDS, BETTERING THEIR EDUCATION AS WELL.

Please try to understand this before one of us grows old and dies...

RainyDay · 13-12-2012 12:35AM

dotsman wrote: »

I really have to stop reading this thread. My head hurts from the amount of times I have banged off my desk reading things like this.

YOUR TAXES ARE BEING SPENT ON ALL KIDS EQUALLY!!!

SOME PARENTS CHOOSE TO SPEND A PORTION OF THEIR HARD-EARNED, AFTER-TAX INCOME ON SUBSIDISING THEIR CHILDREN'S SCHOOL, IN THE BELIEF/HOPE OF BETTERING THE EDUCATION PROVIDED. IN DOING SO, THEY ALSO END UP SPENDING THEIR AFTER-TAX INCOME ON OTHER PEOPLE'S KIDS, BETTERING THEIR EDUCATION AS WELL.

Please try to understand this before one of us grows old and dies...

So I presume that you want the State to start paying the wages of the docs and nurses in the Blackrock clinic and the Beacon too, right?

VinLieger · 13-12-2012 12:38AM

RainyDay wrote: »

So I presume that you want the State to start paying the wages of the docs and nurses in the Blackrock clinic and the Beacon too, right?

Well considering they arent constitutionally entitled to it unlike every child is to education i fail to see the relevance of this question?

armchair fusilier · 13-12-2012 12:38AM

steddyeddy wrote: »

You see the problem I have with other peoples view is that money should never determine quality of education. Only intelligence should do that.

But it's not as simple as that. I went to a state school in Cork with a catchment area that was mostly middle class. That school performed as well academically as the two fee paying schools in the city.

It's largely down to expectations. Broadly speaking middle class parents expect their kids to go on to 3rd level and the kids themselves expect the same thing, families from less well off areas less so. There's more too it than just public v private.

steddyeddy · 13-12-2012 12:39AM

Ziphius wrote: »

I think more interesting question is: do you?

How is this any different from saying education is the exclusive right of the wealthy?

Well I will include the hard working and intelligent as a caveat. It's different because an intellgence and hard work are the corner stones of academia not wealth. Yes all children deserve an equal education but not all deserve college.

VinLieger · 13-12-2012 12:42AM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well I will include the hard working and intelligent as a caveat. It's different because an intellgence and hard work are the corner stones of academia not wealth. Yes all children deserve an equal education but not all deserve college.

I completely agree how about we means test college instead? So people who can pay for it do and those who cant dont and maybe have several grades between the 2 extremes based on the parents income? Meanwhile adjusting the useless points system which is a much bigger problem to your equal education idea than the 100m grant.

steddyeddy · 13-12-2012 12:43AM

armchair fusilier wrote: »

But it's not as simple as that. I went to a state school in Cork with a catchment area that was mostly middle class. That school performed as well academically as the two fee paying schools in the city.

It's largely down to expectations. Broadly speaking middle class parents expect their kids to go on to 3rd level and the kids themselves expect the same thing, families from less well off areas less so. There's more too it than just public v private.

Indeed and I agree with that. What I disagree with is the people maintaining that private school students are inherently more intelligent.

steddyeddy · 13-12-2012 12:45AM

VinLieger wrote: »

I completely agree how about we means test college instead? So people who can pay for it do and those who cant dont and maybe have several grades between the 2 extremes based on the parents income? Meanwhile adjusting the useless points system which is a much bigger problem to your equal education idea than the 100m grant.

I would completely agree with that. All of it especially the usless points system.

EUR100m a year government funding goes to Private schools

Comments