+ Reply to Thread
Page 20 of 31 FirstFirst ... 10181920212230 ... LastLast
Results 191 to 200 of 307
  1. #191
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    950
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked
    135
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Depends on area u live in. If I lived in an area that had good public schools in my catchment- I would send then there. Unfortunately we are in a new estate and the two local state schools have atrocious reputations and I would never send my kids there so would have to look private but would also want a non denominational one. I work in one so would hope to send them there if u had girls ... Unless an amazing state schools gets built near us in the meantime

    Also I've always said I would love to send my kids private BUT save some of the $$ I could have used for private and pay for their university education up front for them (if they choose this path) because HECS debt really sucks!!!

  2. #192
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    10,294
    Thanks
    3,115
    Thanked
    6,304
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Don't most people with kids in full time daycare pay $10-16k a year in fees ? I'm pretty sure most are not wealthy

    as I mentioned I have friends working 2 jobs and others that are definitely not wealthy sending their kids to what some would classify as elitist schools , we all went to private schools for our whole school lives and my parents were definitely not wealthy

    we started a savings plan for our DS when he was born and he won't start kindy until 2016, it will be a big financial strain for us and I will have to go back to work to afford it

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Elijahs Mum For This Useful Post:

    NancyBlackett  (21-04-2012)

  4. #193
    Eko's Avatar
    Eko is offline Acrobatic Dominatrix.
    Winner 2012 - Most Politically Correct Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    2,837
    Thanks
    1,083
    Thanked
    1,427
    Reviews
    10
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    I will send my kids to the best school that I can, whether it's private or public. I've been in both systems and have had friends teaching in both a lot of private school teachers that I've spoken to say that they want their kids in a public school.

    I think a lot of people make assumptions that private schools are better without actually researching the school itself. More money doesn't always indicate a better education.

  5. #194
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,839
    Thanks
    6,199
    Thanked
    16,883
    Reviews
    10
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 postsDiamond Star - 20,000 posts
    Awards:
    Bubhub Blogger - Thanks100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by lambjam View Post
    So those who pay more... receive less?
    Yes. If a school is charging over 10k a child they should require little to no govt funding. For say PLC that charges 25k for a senior school student, statistically it just doesn't require that much money to teach that child... I think 11k was the figure given?? that extra 14k will go into providing nice buildings and swimming pools, why is more required? Again, is someone wants to send their child there and pay the 25k, fair enough. But lets be really honest here, with the fees they charge they can provide everything plus much more than the student needs. The govt shouldn't give big money just for the sake of it.

    Our local little catholic school charges 2.5k per year. That's well below what it costs them to educate the student, so I have no issue with their funding. It's 2.5k less that the govt is funding if they went public. But when a school is charging well above what it costs (so therefore there is a substantial profit) and expects the same funding as our local catholic, l then I don't agree with that.

    This really isn't an attack against the rich. It's just economic sense. The funding simply isn't needed. Now if PLC suddenly dropped it's fees way below the education cost per student, then we would be having a different discussion

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to delirium For This Useful Post:

    babyla  (21-04-2012)

  7. #195
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    7,878
    Thanks
    3,397
    Thanked
    5,160
    Reviews
    8
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by delirium View Post
    Yes. If a school is charging over 10k a child they should require little to no govt funding. For say PLC that charges 25k for a senior school student, statistically it just doesn't require that much money to teach that child... I think 11k was the figure given?? that extra 14k will go into providing nice buildings and swimming pools, why is more required? Again, is someone wants to send their child there and pay the 25k, fair enough. But lets be really honest here, with the fees they charge they can provide everything plus much more than the student needs. The govt shouldn't give big money just for the sake of it.

    Our local little catholic school charges 2.5k per year. That's well below what it costs them to educate the student, so I have no issue with their funding. It's 2.5k less that the govt is funding if they went public. But when a school is charging well above what it costs (so therefore there is a substantial profit) and expects the same funding as our local catholic, l then I don't agree with that.

    This really isn't an attack against the rich. It's just economic sense. The funding simply isn't needed. Now if PLC suddenly dropped it's fees way below the education cost per student, then we would be having a different discussion
    I couldn't agree more. Good economic sense means not throwing money where it is not required.

  8. #196
    lambjam's Avatar
    lambjam is offline Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    7,177
    Thanks
    2,062
    Thanked
    4,956
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by delirium View Post
    Yes. If a school is charging over 10k a child they should require little to no govt funding. For say PLC that charges 25k for a senior school student, statistically it just doesn't require that much money to teach that child... I think 11k was the figure given?? that extra 14k will go into providing nice buildings and swimming pools, why is more required? Again, is someone wants to send their child there and pay the 25k, fair enough. But lets be really honest here, with the fees they charge they can provide everything plus much more than the student needs. The govt shouldn't give big money just for the sake of it.
    For a moment, think of it this way... what if a child goes to a public school and their parents spend x amount of money on swimming lessons, music lessons, art, language, and a maths tutor. Under your scheme that child still receives full government funding for their education, and because their parents can afford extras they get those too.

    Take another child whose parents decide instead to spend that money entirely on school fees, use the school's pool and other amenities and programs. Under your scheme that child receives no government funding, but their parents are potentially spending the same amount of money on their education as the first child.

    How is that fair? And who are you to dictate the ways in which people juggle these things?

    If the government funding to private schools was going toward profits, I would support your case. But it isn't, it is going towards the base level of the students' education. If parents decide that they want to pay extra for nice buildings and swimming pools then that's their business, but that base level of education should be funded for everyone.

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to lambjam For This Useful Post:

    Guest654  (21-04-2012)

  10. #197
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    7,878
    Thanks
    3,397
    Thanked
    5,160
    Reviews
    8
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by lambjam View Post
    For a moment, think of it this way... what if a child goes to a public school and their parents spend x amount of money on swimming lessons, music lessons, art, language, and a maths tutor. Under your scheme that child still receives full government funding for their education, and because their parents can afford extras they get those too.

    Take another child whose parents decide instead to spend that money entirely on school fees, use the school's pool and other amenities and programs. Under your scheme that child receives no government funding, but their parents are potentially spending the same amount of money on their education as the first child.

    How is that fair? And who are you to dictate the ways in which people juggle these things?

    If the government funding to private schools was going toward profits, I would support your case. But it isn't, it is going towards the base level of the students' education. If parents decide that they want to pay extra for nice buildings and swimming pools then that's their business, but that base level of education should be funded for everyone.
    But it's not about how you spend your own money, spend it on whatever you like for your children. It's about how the government is spending money, putting money into areas where it is not needed.

  11. #198
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,839
    Thanks
    6,199
    Thanked
    16,883
    Reviews
    10
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 postsDiamond Star - 20,000 posts
    Awards:
    Bubhub Blogger - Thanks100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by lambjam View Post
    For a moment, think of it this way... what if a child goes to a public school and their parents spend x amount of money on swimming lessons, music lessons, art, language, and a maths tutor. Under your scheme that child still receives full government funding for their education, and because their parents can afford extras they get those too.

    Take another child whose parents decide instead to spend that money entirely on school fees, use the school's pool and other amenities and programs. Under your scheme that child receives no government funding, but their parents are potentially spending the same amount of money on their education as the first child.

    How is that fair? And who are you to dictate the ways in which people juggle these things?
    I see it as different bc the school isn't providing all these extras and making a profit off them, besides I doubt a public school parent would spend 25k on tutoring or swimming lessons? and as a public school parent I would be questioning what was wrong with the school that that amount of money and time was required to give my child a basic education?

    I don't have any power to dictate anything. I'm simply responding to the questions of the OP and further discussion of others as you are. We just see it differently. You think it's unfair for large private schools to not get govt funding. I think it's unfair that money yet again gets you a better life from a school that doesn't need the funding to begin with. I guess we are never going to agree and that's fine

  12. #199
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    my house
    Posts
    17,696
    Thanks
    1,391
    Thanked
    7,285
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Elijahs Mum View Post
    Don't most people with kids in full time daycare pay $10-16k a year in fees ? I'm pretty sure most are not wealthy

    as I mentioned I have friends working 2 jobs and others that are definitely not wealthy sending their kids to what some would classify as elitist schools , we all went to private schools for our whole school lives and my parents were definitely not wealthy

    we started a savings plan for our DS when he was born and he won't start kindy until 2016, it will be a big financial strain for us and I will have to go back to work to afford it
    I'm off to a birthday party, so will reply to others later, but low-income families receive ccb, single parebts can get discounts and everybody who is working or studying etc. receive the 50% rebate. I don't think private schools offer those.

  13. #200
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,839
    Thanks
    6,199
    Thanked
    16,883
    Reviews
    10
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 postsDiamond Star - 20,000 posts
    Awards:
    Bubhub Blogger - Thanks100 Posts in a week
    and I wanted to add before I go about my day, that the anger should be directed at the school for charging you so much. If you hypothetically pay 13k a year, the school gets 2k profit from your child after expenses. If your fees were dropped to say 9k, you would pay 4k less, and I would support the school getting 2k per student to make up the shortfall.


 

Similar Threads

  1. When do public schools Nsw go back
    By jagamoe in forum General Chat
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 14-07-2012, 06:46
  2. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 31-05-2012, 12:57

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
free weekly newsletters | sign up now!
who are these people who write great posts? meet our hubbub authors!
Learn how you can contribute to the hubbub!

reviews
learn how you can become a reviewer!

competitions

forum - chatting now
christmas gift guidesee all Red Stocking
Babybee Prams
Save $50 in our pre-Christmas sale! All Comet's now only $500. Our bassinet & stroller set includes free shipping AUS wide, $75 free accessories, 18-months warranty & a 9 month free return policy. Check out our new designer range today!
sales & new stuffsee all
Pea Pods
Buy 2 Award Winning Pea Pods Reusable One Size Nappies for only $38 (in your choice of colours) and receive a FREE roll of Bamboo Liners. Don't miss out, we don't usually have discounts on the nappies, so grab this special offer!
Special Offer! Save $12
featured supporter
henry and grace
Summer Cool. We are the only brand in the world to use ultrafine Merino wool to produce the finest, softest & most luxurious garments whilst keeping mum and bub cool and dry. Wear them multiple times before machine washing-hard to believe, but true.
gotcha
X

Pregnant for the first-time?

Not sure where to start? We can help!

Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!