RuamRudy

I am from Scotland - worse than your country, we let an endless stream of useless and corrupt people from the country next door rule us and steal all our wealth. But just because we are surrounded by such weak and venal leadership doesn't mean we shouldn't aspire for better.

I think it's the US as a whole that is going to be in for a shock. The one dimensional thinking of people such as Gaetz and the other one trick pony shock politics-lite grifters might keep the perma-angry throwbacks content for a while. But the US has shown the world just how far it has declined by handing power to such incapable, irresponsible people.

So respect is only offered if they live within your defined guidelines?

I never mentioned any party in particular - why do you assume otherwise?

Eventually Israel will stop their rampage of meting out death and destruction on innocent Palestinians without mercy, and a sense of calm will resume in the region. But just as their past decades of murder and land theft have generated countless martyrs in the middle east, the current orgy of indiscriminate and unchallenged murders will reverberate far wider and deeper. And so, the seemingly endless cycle will continue and the Israelis will remain with their hand out to the west as they cry victimhood.

Is this correct? Fifteen grand, whilst not exactly pocket money, seems too paltry an amount to be the difference between solvency and penury for a former royal.

Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds - Wanted Man

The Specials - Maggie's Farm

If that is what you were thinking when you wrote it, it did not materialise thus by the time you finished typing. The statement you wrote is unambiguous but incorrect. Parents who can afford to bite into their budget can send their children to private school. That is as truthful today as it was this time last year.

You did.

They can - private schools have not been outlawed.

That money, instead of being spent of profit making entities, needs to be ploughed back into the public sector. Unfortunately the tories have wrecked so many institutions across the UK, education is only one of the sectors to which their greed and ignorance caused massive damage. But the answer to their failure is not to continue it.

Then the government should fix the problem, not give concessions to a tiny minority. So let's not pretend for one second that special education kids up and down the country are being supported by fee paying schools.

In Finland for-profit schools are banned altogether.

There already is a legal obligation on education authorities to provide appropriate learning opportunities for all children. If parents are not happy with the the provision on offer they are free to seek alternatives. That will not change. They remain free to seek alternative education resources.

I have no idea about the veracity of your numbers, but if correct then thats is a lot of money into the economy, jobs in the construction industry, suppliers, skills and learning, plus new teachers and the knock on effect through the circular economy - that's a win win that will reverberate in communities across the country for years.

I must admit that I am at a bit of a loss here. This is like trying to reason with a toddler, and unfortunately I am not particularly good at trying to argue with those for whom rational thinking is not a learned skill. The state provides access to free primary and secondary education for each and every child in the UK. There is no need for parents to send their children to fee paying schools, therefore fee paying schools are not essential. That some people can afford it, and choose to do so is a private matter and is entirely up to them. They are, quite rightly, free to go down that avenue. But their choice is, like most other services the public chooses to consume, vatable. The above is not a claim. The above is fact. You may not like it but that does not give my point any less validity.

I cannot provide a link which definitively confirms that fee paying schools are non essential. Can you prove that they are essential? Also, about that human rights thing - exactly what human rights are being violated?

Is this really your argument? If I can't provide a link to show that fee paying schools in the UK are not essential then I am wrong? That doesn't make their case any more valid. No, I didn't. What human rights are being violated?

1) That's not an analogous example; 2) No, but nobody is suggesting to the contrary.

Or the politics of your warped mind?

But that was your argument, or at least the argument of Nick Carter icp - that exemptions are not subsidies. But then you backed it up with an article that agreed that they are, cherry picking from it one small section as if it was the definitive conclusion of the article. Spoiler - it isn't.

Fee paying schools are non essential - absolutely no doubt about that. If you are confused then the confusion is all yours.

From the article you posted: "The Court said tax exemption is a subsidy, just not a cash subsidy. " The big graphic at the top of the article is: This is the article which supposedly makes you right and me wrong. Well, in your head at least.

Well done - it's just a pity that the title of the article can't even back up Mr Walz's assertion with confidence.