Bill Shorten links penalty rates with parents affording private schools

Date
    October 5, 2015


Opposition Leader Bill Shorten has defended penalty rates, saying the extra income is the difference between parents sending their children to private schools over public schools.   :-?   

Mr Shorten on Monday said millions of Australians would be enjoying the Labour Day public holiday, which is in place in several states across the country including New South Wales and the ACT.


Opposition Leader Bill Shorten has defended penalty rates, saying they allow parents to afford private schools.

On a public holiday, a casually employed cafe worker aged 21 or more serving coffee earns $52.23 an hour, according to the Fair Work Commission's online pay calculator. Small businesses say the high wages force many cafes and small stores to close, because opening would mean operating at a loss.


But Mr Shorten said these loadings were the difference between a parent's child going to a public or private school. 

"See Labor is not out of touch with how people make their money," Mr Shorten told reporters in Sydney.




"For people on $40,000 and $50,000 and $60,000 dollars a year, penalty rates are the difference as to whether or not they can afford to send their kids to a private school," he said.   :(

"In the retail industry and in the hospitality industry – they are on average, along with agriculture, the lowest paid industries in Australia," he said.   :(

"If you were to take away penalty rates from these groups, you would even depress their wages further," he said.

The federal government, under the leadership of new Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull is leaving open the possibility of cutting Sunday penalty rates but says any move would be taken to the next election.

The Productivity Commission, which is independent of government, is investigating Australia's workplace laws.  It said in its draft report that Sunday double-time loadings should be brought into line with the Saturday rate of 150 per cent of an hourly wage for the retail and hospitality sectors only.

Unions are vowing to unleash a "fierce" campaign that they say will be bigger than the one they waged in 2007 against former Prime Minister John Howard's labour market deregulation policy of WorkChoices. Labor subsequently won the election that year and soon after repealed the policy and replaced it with the Fair Work Act.

Victoria's shadow treasurer Michael O'Brien highlighted the issue on Friday by posting a sign from a local cafe in his state electorate of Malvern highlighting the cost of paying workers double time and a half on the state's new controversial grand final eve public holiday.

"We have had to apply a 10% surcharge today to cover min wage being of over $50 an hour," the cafe's sign read.

Mr O'Brien said on Twitter: "'A rare Malvern cafe open today. Owner says "If we break even today I'll call that a win'".

Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/bill-shorten-links-penalty-rates-with-parents-affording-private-schools-20151005-gk1ehw.html#ixzz3nfxJTViP

really???...so what happens when they go on holiday and miss out on the penalty rates that they have now spent before they have earned it????... ::) ::)

we are looking at 5 weeks holidays...as well as a 6 hour day if greenwin has his way..so a 6 hour Sunday would mean a dip in penalty pay...all those lefties with their kids in private schools.... ::) ::) wow things are changing... ;D ;D.. does it smack of capitalism??>.

Major gaffe by Shorten, that. A real private school charges like $30K+ per year, more if the kid is boarding.

Those on $60K a year are worrying about paying the rent.

And there is something wrong with a public school? Or is it that they don't teach that leftie kumbayah singing curriculum?

Every place is different is it not Cods?.  Yes people should get penalty rates, if they work weekends or public holidays.  Here is something to think about.  I once had a job where the hours were 10 hour days, working four days a week.  In other words every week was a long weekend.   :) 

wrote on Oct 5^th, 2015 at 5:42pm:

Every place is different is it not Cods?.  Yes people should get penalty rates, if they work weekends or public holidays.  Here is something to think about.  I once had a job where the hours were 10 hour days, working four days a week.  In other words every week was a long weekend.   :)

I have a feeling that you are in the wrong thread sir, or.....have another scotch  ;D

Yes that scotch is very expensive is it not?.  Penalty rates can help you pay for it.  Not that I drink it.   :D

Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 5^th, 2015 at 5:38pm:

Major gaffe by Shorten, that. A real private school charges like $30K+ per year, more if the kid is boarding. Those on $60K a year are worrying about paying the rent.

Try again. Even in your own state the truly elite schools dont charge that. The Catholic system charges a tenth of that or less and most other independent schools charge not that much more.

This is a real leftie conundrum. Lefties are typically very opposed to the mere existence of private schools (or private anything) and now one of their own is claiming that penalty rates makes private schools more affordable.

I can't wait to see the usual lefties try and weasel out of this one!

Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 5^th, 2015 at 5:38pm:

Major gaffe by Shorten, that. A real private school charges like $30K+ per year, more if the kid is boarding. Those on $60K a year are worrying about paying the rent.

rubbish .... while I acknowledge there are those schools, you can also get them a lot cheaper.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 5^th, 2015 at 6:09pm:

This is a real leftie conundrum. Lefties are typically very opposed to the mere existence of private schools (or private anything) and now one of their own is claiming that penalty rates makes private schools more affordable. I can't wait to see the usual lefties try and weasel out of this one!

talking through your arse again maria? if by the left you mean the labor party, they have always provided funding for private schools

if by left you mean others posting on ozpol, they aren't opposed to the existance of private schools, they're opposed to using public funds

it's really not that hard to follow the bouncing ball Maria, all you have to do is shut up and listen

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 5^th, 2015 at 7:02pm:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 5th, 2015 at 6:09pm: This is a real leftie conundrum. Lefties are typically very opposed to the mere existence of private schools (or private anything) and now one of their own is claiming that penalty rates makes private schools more affordable. I can't wait to see the usual lefties try and weasel out of this one! talking through your arse again maria? if by the left you mean the labor party, they have always provided funding for private schools if by left you mean others posting on ozpol, they aren't opposed to the existance of private schools, they're opposed to using public funds it's really not that hard to follow the bouncing ball Maria, all you have to do is shut up and listen

I'm not particularly opposed to funding private schools with public money, but with conditions.
1. Transparency of funding.
2. Either run not-for-profit, or if they are run as for-profit businesses they pay taxes like other businesses.

Bam wrote on Oct 5^th, 2015 at 7:46pm:

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 5th, 2015 at 7:02pm: mariacostel wrote on Oct 5th, 2015 at 6:09pm: This is a real leftie conundrum. Lefties are typically very opposed to the mere existence of private schools (or private anything) and now one of their own is claiming that penalty rates makes private schools more affordable. I can't wait to see the usual lefties try and weasel out of this one! talking through your arse again maria? if by the left you mean the labor party, they have always provided funding for private schools if by left you mean others posting on ozpol, they aren't opposed to the existance of private schools, they're opposed to using public funds it's really not that hard to follow the bouncing ball Maria, all you have to do is shut up and listen I'm not particularly opposed to funding private schools with public money, but with conditions. 1. Transparency of funding. 2. Either run not-for-profit, or if they are run as for-profit businesses they pay taxes like other businesses.

Are there ANY for-profit private schools? The Catholic System isnt and the private church schools are also not for profit. Before you head off to where I expect you to go, even no-for-profits run with a surplus as it is the only way to survive and these surpluses are ploughed back into better facilities and in most schools, fee assistance for the less well off plus scholarships.

Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 5^th, 2015 at 5:38pm:

Major gaffe by Shorten, that. A real private school charges like $30K+ per year, more if the kid is boarding. Those on $60K a year are worrying about paying the rent.

Spot on!

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 5^th, 2015 at 6:59pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 5th, 2015 at 5:38pm: Major gaffe by Shorten, that. A real private school charges like $30K+ per year, more if the kid is boarding. Those on $60K a year are worrying about paying the rent. rubbish .... while I acknowledge there are those schools, you can also get them a lot cheaper.

A cheap option is around 15K these days.

Still, not too cheap if you're on 60K.

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 5^th, 2015 at 10:44pm:

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 5th, 2015 at 6:59pm: Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 5th, 2015 at 5:38pm: Major gaffe by Shorten, that. A real private school charges like $30K+ per year, more if the kid is boarding. Those on $60K a year are worrying about paying the rent. rubbish .... while I acknowledge there are those schools, you can also get them a lot cheaper. A cheap option is around 15K these days. Still, not too cheap if you're on 60K.

depends on where you are

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 5^th, 2015 at 10:44pm:

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 5th, 2015 at 6:59pm: Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 5th, 2015 at 5:38pm: Major gaffe by Shorten, that. A real private school charges like $30K+ per year, more if the kid is boarding. Those on $60K a year are worrying about paying the rent. rubbish .... while I acknowledge there are those schools, you can also get them a lot cheaper. A cheap option is around 15K these days. Still, not too cheap if you're on 60K.

AB PAttersons, rated the number 1 private school in Qld.

Starting from $9,032.40 p.a.

http://www.privateschoolsguide.com/A.B.-Paterson-College-Qld/

probably the best investment a parent can make.

beg, borrow or steal but get your kids mixing with the cream , as cream like behaviour is contagious.

and getting a leg up into the workforce is all about social circle, so the more cream you mix with, the more you will get opportunities from your cream-like classmates.

its not what you know, its who you know, and you want to be surrounding yourself with positive, dynamic, charged, optomisitic people .

public school teachers seem unionised, unmotivated, burnt out and beaten down.

this is no place for your children.

get them the hell out of the leftard , black armband, self loathing, dysfunctional public school system which teaches nothing but negative neurotic thinking, limiting beliefs and success barriers.

aquascoot wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 10:58am:

get them the hell out of the leftard , black armband, self loathing, dysfunctional public school system which teaches nothing but negative neurotic thinking, limiting beliefs and success barriers.

Every school is different, and while nothing I have ever seen resembles the fantasy you have dreamt up, you would do well to remember that "public schools" are not some massive entity, but separate organisations made up of individual teachers and students.

If you really don't like the one for whatever reason, there will usually be two or three other options available, with the exception of rural areas of course that may cater to your best interests.  Many secondary schools in particular have a greater focus on vocational studies if academia isn't to your liking.

Stratos wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 11:15am:

aquascoot wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 10:58am: get them the hell out of the leftard , black armband, self loathing, dysfunctional public school system which teaches nothing but negative neurotic thinking, limiting beliefs and success barriers. Every school is different, and while nothing I have ever seen resembles the fantasy you have dreamt up, you would do well to remember that "public schools" are not some massive entity, but separate organisations made up of individual teachers and students. If you really don't like the one for whatever reason, there will usually be two or three other options available, with the exception of rural areas of course that may cater to your best interests.  Many secondary schools in particular have a greater focus on vocational studies if academia isn't to your liking.

I'm pretty sure someone did a study and found that every dollar spent on a private education returned five dollars in terms of lifetime increased income.

better then super
better then sydney residential property.

value at 3 x the price.

My Children do very well at public school....The last thing I would want for my children is to be indoctrinated into some self serving faith based bullshit....Giving religions tax free status is criminal IMO!!!

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/how-rich-vatican-so-wealthy-it-can-stumble-across-millions-euros-just-tucked-away-1478219

>:( >:( >:(

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 11:26am:

Giving religions tax free status is criminal IMO!!!

..what about unions?

PS...and I'm not disagreeing

Private schools coach students to pass exams and do well at NAPLAN etc. Then the student leaves school for Uni or work and the intense coaching is no longer there. Some can’t handle that.

When you come out of a good public school you are much more self reliant, a quality the fantasists Scoot would say is a rightard quality.

Private schools are like public selective high schools ....they push kids to perform well.

Both the above types of schools are the way to go.

Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 11:38am:

Private schools coach students to pass exams and do well at NAPLAN etc. Then the student leaves school for Uni or work and the intense coaching is no longer there. Some can’t handle that. When you come out of a good public school you are much more self reliant, a quality the fantasists Scoot would say is a rightard quality.

I went to public school.  I don't quite remember the "self reliance" subject?

I guess combating the intimidation of the collectivists bullies and peer pressures installed some self reliance (and kicked off a lifetime dislike of collectivism)  :(

Swagman wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 11:36am:

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 11:26am: Giving religions tax free status is criminal IMO!!! ..what about unions? PS...and I'm not disagreeing

Gidday Swag....IMO unions should not get any tax free status either....Unions and the church should be allowed to claim for charity or community based work but pay tax on any profits like anyone else....I have no problem with people believing what ever they like as long as the taxpayer does not have to pay for their faith!!!

:-? :-? :-?

aquascoot wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 11:22am:

Stratos wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 11:15am: aquascoot wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 10:58am: get them the hell out of the leftard , black armband, self loathing, dysfunctional public school system which teaches nothing but negative neurotic thinking, limiting beliefs and success barriers. Every school is different, and while nothing I have ever seen resembles the fantasy you have dreamt up, you would do well to remember that "public schools" are not some massive entity, but separate organisations made up of individual teachers and students. If you really don't like the one for whatever reason, there will usually be two or three other options available, with the exception of rural areas of course that may cater to your best interests.  Many secondary schools in particular have a greater focus on vocational studies if academia isn't to your liking. I'm pretty sure someone did a study and found that every dollar spent on a private education returned five dollars in terms of lifetime increased income. better then super better then sydney residential property. value at 3 x the price.

Care to share?

.....

Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 11:38am:

Private schools coach students to pass exams and do well at NAPLAN etc. Then the student leaves school for Uni or work and the intense coaching is no longer there. Some can’t handle that. When you come out of a good public school you are much more self reliant, a quality the fantasists Scoot would say is a rightard quality.

I went to a public school and finished year 12 with all second levels. My brother-in-law went to a private school and finished year 12 with all first levels. I passed my first year uni with credits and went on to get 2 degrees. He failed his first year 3 years in a row and never got a degree.  Private schools are BS. Those who benefit from private schoos are are largely due to the old school tie network that develops around private schools and has very little to do with a superior education. No tax $$$$$ should ever go into private schools. Public schools should be free to all. If you are so elitist you need your kids to go to private schools then you should pay for it yourself. You want privileges then you pay for the priviliges.Simple really.

Stratos wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 12:46pm:

aquascoot wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 11:22am: Stratos wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 11:15am: aquascoot wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 10:58am: get them the hell out of the leftard , black armband, self loathing, dysfunctional public school system which teaches nothing but negative neurotic thinking, limiting beliefs and success barriers. Every school is different, and while nothing I have ever seen resembles the fantasy you have dreamt up, you would do well to remember that "public schools" are not some massive entity, but separate organisations made up of individual teachers and students. If you really don't like the one for whatever reason, there will usually be two or three other options available, with the exception of rural areas of course that may cater to your best interests.  Many secondary schools in particular have a greater focus on vocational studies if academia isn't to your liking. I'm pretty sure someone did a study and found that every dollar spent on a private education returned five dollars in terms of lifetime increased income. better then super better then sydney residential property. value at 3 x the price. Care to share?

from memory it was a study undertaken by the private school industry  :D :D :D :D :D  ... not that they are biased much  ;D ;D ;D

aquascoot wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 10:58am:

probably the best investment a parent can make. beg, borrow or steal but get your kids mixing with the cream , as cream like behaviour is contagious. and getting a leg up into the workforce is all about social circle, so the more cream you mix with, the more you will get opportunities from your cream-like classmates. its not what you know, its who you know, and you want to be surrounding yourself with positive, dynamic, charged, optomisitic people . public school teachers seem unionised, unmotivated, burnt out and beaten down. this is no place for your children. get them the hell out of the leftard , black armband, self loathing, dysfunctional public school system which teaches nothing but negative neurotic thinking, limiting beliefs and success barriers.

that is the only benefit to private schools, the circle of friends they make. As far as education goes in my opinion public is better.

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 11:26am:

My Children do very well at public school....The last thing I would want for my children is to be indoctrinated into some self serving faith based bullshit....Giving religions tax free status is criminal IMO!!! http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/how-rich-vatican-so-wealthy-it-can-stumble-across-millions-euros-just-tucked-away-1478219 >:( >:( >:(

And instead you pass on your personal prejudices to your kids. Well done!

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 11:53am:

Swagman wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 11:36am: philperth2010 wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 11:26am: Giving religions tax free status is criminal IMO!!! ..what about unions? PS...and I'm not disagreeing Gidday Swag....IMO unions should not get any tax free status either....Unions and the church should be allowed to claim for charity or community based work but pay tax on any profits like anyone else....I have no problem with people believing what ever they like as long as the taxpayer does not have to pay for their faith!!! :-? :-? :-?

I'm fascinated to hear where you think churches make 'profits'. Go on... List for me all the massive Church owned businesses. They are very few and far between. Oh, let me guess.  You want to include as profit the money that parishioners give?  Well let's see how well that works out in the charity sector if they all have to pay tax on every dollar you give them which you have already paid tax on!

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 12:47pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 11:38am: Private schools coach students to pass exams and do well at NAPLAN etc. Then the student leaves school for Uni or work and the intense coaching is no longer there. Some can’t handle that. When you come out of a good public school you are much more self reliant, a quality the fantasists Scoot would say is a rightard quality. I went to a public school and finished year 12 with all second levels. My brother-in-law went to a private school and finished year 12 with all first levels. I passed my first year uni with credits and went on to get 2 degrees. He failed his first year 3 years in a row and never got a degree.  Private schools are BS. Those who benefit from private schoos are are largely due to the old school tie network that develops around private schools and has very little to do with a superior education. No tax $$$$$ should ever go into private schools. Public schools should be free to all. If you are so elitist you need your kids to go to private schools then you should pay for it yourself. You want privileges then you pay for the priviliges.Simple really.

Nothing quite like taking a single example and drawing a policy out of it.  Clearly you know NOTHING about private schools and the ignorance you display on virtually every topic you speak on here is testament to what your public school taught you.

All it gave you was a chip on your shoulder.

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 1:13pm:

aquascoot wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 10:58am: probably the best investment a parent can make. beg, borrow or steal but get your kids mixing with the cream , as cream like behaviour is contagious. and getting a leg up into the workforce is all about social circle, so the more cream you mix with, the more you will get opportunities from your cream-like classmates. its not what you know, its who you know, and you want to be surrounding yourself with positive, dynamic, charged, optomisitic people . public school teachers seem unionised, unmotivated, burnt out and beaten down. this is no place for your children. get them the hell out of the leftard , black armband, self loathing, dysfunctional public school system which teaches nothing but negative neurotic thinking, limiting beliefs and success barriers. that is the only benefit to private schools, the circle of friends they make. As far as education goes in my opinion public is better.

its also why all sensible business people get involved in charities and fund raisers etc.
you network with

1  successful people
2  people with an abundant mentality
3  givers not takers.


as i have said before, poor people should save up and take rich people out to dinner and pick their brains.
wisdom of the world available.
value at 3 x the price

:D :D :D

mariacostel wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 6:32pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 11:26am: My Children do very well at public school....The last thing I would want for my children is to be indoctrinated into some self serving faith based bullshit....Giving religions tax free status is criminal IMO!!! http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/how-rich-vatican-so-wealthy-it-can-stumble-across-millions-euros-just-tucked-away-1478219 >:( >:( >:( And instead you pass on your personal prejudices to your kids. Well done!

How would you know....I don't remember telling you anything about my children???

:-? :-? :-?

mariacostel wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 6:32pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 11:26am: My Children do very well at public school....The last thing I would want for my children is to be indoctrinated into some self serving faith based bullshit....Giving religions tax free status is criminal IMO!!! http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/how-rich-vatican-so-wealthy-it-can-stumble-across-millions-euros-just-tucked-away-1478219 >:( >:( >:( And instead you pass on your personal prejudices to your kids. Well done!

and I suppose you've never told your kids they get a better education in private schools?  :D :D :D :D

aquascoot wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 6:51pm:

its also why all sensible business people get involved in charities and fund raisers etc.

I thought it was because they wanted to help whatever cause they were supporting!

mariacostel wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 6:34pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 11:53am: Swagman wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 11:36am: philperth2010 wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 11:26am: Giving religions tax free status is criminal IMO!!! ..what about unions? PS...and I'm not disagreeing Gidday Swag....IMO unions should not get any tax free status either....Unions and the church should be allowed to claim for charity or community based work but pay tax on any profits like anyone else....I have no problem with people believing what ever they like as long as the taxpayer does not have to pay for their faith!!! :-? :-? :-? I'm fascinated to hear where you think churches make 'profits'. Go on... List for me all the massive Church owned businesses. They are very few and far between. Oh, let me guess.  You want to include as profit the money that parishioners give?  Well let's see how well that works out in the charity sector if they all have to pay tax on every dollar you give them which you have already paid tax on!

I posted a link to show the obscene profits made tax free by the church or did you ignore that???

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/how-rich-vatican-so-wealthy-it-can-stumble-across-millions-euros-just-tucked-away-1478219

You can also claim a tax deduction on charitable gifts which blows your crap about already paying tax out of the water!!!

::) ::) ::)

mariacostel wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 6:36pm:

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 12:47pm: Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 11:38am: Private schools coach students to pass exams and do well at NAPLAN etc. Then the student leaves school for Uni or work and the intense coaching is no longer there. Some can’t handle that. When you come out of a good public school you are much more self reliant, a quality the fantasists Scoot would say is a rightard quality. I went to a public school and finished year 12 with all second levels. My brother-in-law went to a private school and finished year 12 with all first levels. I passed my first year uni with credits and went on to get 2 degrees. He failed his first year 3 years in a row and never got a degree.  Private schools are BS. Those who benefit from private schoos are are largely due to the old school tie network that develops around private schools and has very little to do with a superior education. No tax $$$$$ should ever go into private schools. Public schools should be free to all. If you are so elitist you need your kids to go to private schools then you should pay for it yourself. You want privileges then you pay for the priviliges.Simple really. Nothing quite like taking a single example and drawing a policy out of it.  Clearly you know NOTHING about private schools and the ignorance you display on virtually every topic you speak on here is testament to what your public school taught you. All it gave you was a chip on your shoulder.

My experience was consistent with Jovial Monk's claim that private schools coach students to pass exams and do well at NAPLAN etc. but do not actually give them a good education and therefore was worthwhile evidence to post. 

I actually started my schooling in a private school and did my last 2 years in a public school and am therefore in a very good position to compare and can say without hesitation that my public school education was far superior.  Indeed, consistent with monk's claim, my private school experience was focused on rote learning (to achieve good exam results - and thereby generate profits) instead of teaching students how to think for themselves.  Indeed, over the years we have debated, your constant inability to construct informed logical arguments and your inability to draw even the most obvious conclusions causes me to think that you had a spoon fed private education without any effort given to teaching you how to actually think for yourself.  The rote arguments you trot out here is testament to that.    

....

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 1:13pm:

aquascoot wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 10:58am: probably the best investment a parent can make. beg, borrow or steal but get your kids mixing with the cream , as cream like behaviour is contagious. and getting a leg up into the workforce is all about social circle, so the more cream you mix with, the more you will get opportunities from your cream-like classmates. its not what you know, its who you know, and you want to be surrounding yourself with positive, dynamic, charged, optomisitic people . public school teachers seem unionised, unmotivated, burnt out and beaten down. this is no place for your children. get them the hell out of the leftard , black armband, self loathing, dysfunctional public school system which teaches nothing but negative neurotic thinking, limiting beliefs and success barriers. that is the only benefit to private schools, the circle of friends they make. As far as education goes in my opinion public is better.

Way to go in destroying that claim simply by being the person who made it.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 8:48pm:

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 1:13pm: aquascoot wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 10:58am: probably the best investment a parent can make. beg, borrow or steal but get your kids mixing with the cream , as cream like behaviour is contagious. and getting a leg up into the workforce is all about social circle, so the more cream you mix with, the more you will get opportunities from your cream-like classmates. its not what you know, its who you know, and you want to be surrounding yourself with positive, dynamic, charged, optomisitic people . public school teachers seem unionised, unmotivated, burnt out and beaten down. this is no place for your children. get them the hell out of the leftard , black armband, self loathing, dysfunctional public school system which teaches nothing but negative neurotic thinking, limiting beliefs and success barriers. that is the only benefit to private schools, the circle of friends they make. As far as education goes in my opinion public is better. Way to go in destroying that claim simply by being the person who made it.

you had a private education, right? it's obvious by the number of lies you consistently put out

If Private schools weren't better than Public schools....then there'd be no private schools.... :D

mariacostel wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 8:48pm:

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 1:13pm: aquascoot wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 10:58am: probably the best investment a parent can make. beg, borrow or steal but get your kids mixing with the cream , as cream like behaviour is contagious. and getting a leg up into the workforce is all about social circle, so the more cream you mix with, the more you will get opportunities from your cream-like classmates. its not what you know, its who you know, and you want to be surrounding yourself with positive, dynamic, charged, optomisitic people . public school teachers seem unionised, unmotivated, burnt out and beaten down. this is no place for your children. get them the hell out of the leftard , black armband, self loathing, dysfunctional public school system which teaches nothing but negative neurotic thinking, limiting beliefs and success barriers. that is the only benefit to private schools, the circle of friends they make. As far as education goes in my opinion public is better. Way to go in destroying that claim simply by being the person who made it.

You mean Tony and Joey didn't go to the same school?  Damn - and all along I thought they stuffed this country by being old bum-chums instead of pure natural born idiots.

I've known enough of that kind of twerp to know I wouldn't trust them to run a chook raffle at a Rugby game...

"water boy.. oh, water boy!"

Swagman wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 10:28pm:

If Private schools weren't better than Public schools....then there'd be no private schools.... :D

User pays - let them pay for it and then we'll see, eh?  Socialism is perfectly all right when you are receiving it.... but not when someone else is.... ;D  ;D  ;D

Swagman wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 10:28pm:

If Private schools weren't better than Public schools....then there'd be no private schools.... :D

An analogy from the past? If Beta was better there would be no VHS.

Setanta wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 5:48am:

Swagman wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 10:28pm: If Private schools weren't better than Public schools....then there'd be no private schools.... :D An analogy from the past? If Beta was better there would be no VHS.

Yes, it's the natural law of all things.  Amelioration swiftly overtakes obsolescence.  :D 

PS (explains the gap between rich and poor too) 

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 1:15am:

Swagman wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 10:28pm: If Private schools weren't better than Public schools....then there'd be no private schools.... :D User pays - let them pay for it and then we'll see, eh?  Socialism is perfectly all right when you are receiving it.... but not when someone else is.... ;D  ;D  ;D

I pay my tax so my kids are entitled to the same education dollar as the next citizen whether they go to private or public schools.  :(

its just a self fulfilling prophesy.

parents who really care about their kids and who really value education will tend to send their kids to private schools.

parents who are on the booze or the drugs or the pokies or the dole or the xbox or the internet porn will tend to want money for these things and tend not to be willing to pay up.

so, no matter whether we had the same level of funding and the same quality of teachers at the start of every year  YOU ARE GETTING A DIFFERENT COHORT OF KIDS  entering each system.

dont try and deny that the kids of druggies and gamblers and dole recipients and the mentally ill and those who have just got out of jail are the going to be easier to teach then those who have parents who read to them every night, play scrabble with them, take them on overseas trips , pay for private tutoring, are great role models and love and cherish their kids,

That arguement just wont fly.

even if we swapped all the teachers in the public into the private sector i would still pay for kids to go private because they will be with motivated, switched on , functional kids who should have better social and emotional intelligence.

in fact, the higher the fees the better as it puts you up from second division to first division to the premier league.

work out what you can afford and then put you kids in the most expensive school you can find .

aquascoot wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 8:03am:

its just a self fulfilling prophesy. parents who really care about their kids and who really value education will tend to send their kids to private schools. parents who are on the booze or the drugs or the pokies or the dole or the xbox or the internet porn will tend to want money for these things and tend not to be willing to pay up. so, no matter whether we had the same level of funding and the same quality of teachers at the start of every year  YOU ARE GETTING A DIFFERENT COHORT OF KIDS  entering each system. dont try and deny that the kids of druggies and gamblers and dole recipients and the mentally ill and those who have just got out of jail are the going to be easier to teach then those who have parents who read to them every night, play scrabble with them, take them on overseas trips , pay for private tutoring, are great role models and love and cherish their kids, That arguement just wont fly. even if we swapped all the teachers in the public into the private sector i would still pay for kids to go private because they will be with motivated, switched on , functional kids who should have better social and emotional intelligence. in fact, the higher the fees the better as it puts you up from second division to first division to the premier league. work out what you can afford and then put you kids in the most expensive school you can find .

Well summed up!

Swagman wrote on Oct 6^th, 2015 at 10:28pm:

If Private schools weren't better than Public schools....then there'd be no private schools.... :D

You know... I've never heard anyone make that point and yet it is perhaps the most powerful argument of all. They exists because people are prepared to pay huge amounts to educated their kids privately ergo they consider them to be a lot better than public schools.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 8:47am:

Swagman wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 10:28pm: If Private schools weren't better than Public schools....then there'd be no private schools.... :D You know... I've never heard anyone make that point and yet it is perhaps the most powerful argument of all. They exist because people are prepared to pay huge amounts to educate their kids privately ergo they consider them to be a lot better than public schools.

Oh duh!

Oooh....I forgot. This is OzPol lol the place where the bleeding obvious needs to be explained and clarified. My bad Maria  :P

Scoot fantasised:


Quote:

motivated, switched on , functional kids who should have better social and emotional intelligence.

Kids who went to private school never grow up, really.

Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 9:02am:

Scoot fantasised: Quote: motivated, switched on , functional kids who should have better social and emotional intelligence. Kids who went to private school never grow up, really.

And what would you know about private schools ....or kids for that matter?

You've never had personal experience with either.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 8:47am:

Swagman wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 10:28pm: If Private schools weren't better than Public schools....then there'd be no private schools.... :D You know... I've never heard anyone make that point and yet it is perhaps the most powerful argument of all. They exists because people are prepared to pay huge amounts to educated their kids privately ergo they consider them to be a lot better than public schools.

they exist because tax payer dollars prop them up .... remove the govt. money and the majority would close.

Probably more than you.

I offer the cases of abbott & hokey, both the product of private schools, both hopeless numpties.

Private schools exist because they offer snob value. That’s it, pretty much. the intensive coaching they do just means private school kids pass exams. If you compare MySchool scores between private and public schools there isn’t that much difference.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 8:47am:

Swagman wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 10:28pm: If Private schools weren't better than Public schools....then there'd be no private schools.... :D You know... I've never heard anyone make that point and yet it is perhaps the most powerful argument of all. They exists because people are prepared to pay huge amounts to educated their kids privately ergo they consider them to be a lot better than public schools.

a tourist traveling through Tibet stopped at an isolated monastery on a mountain top
in the monastery there was a coffee shop with only two items

they were

coffee $2
coffee $200

when the tourist asked the monk what was the difference between the coffee's the monk said $198, yet occasionally people buy the $200 coffee because they think it must be better
 

It may be possible to have your kids do well at a public school.
you would have to do a lot of extra home schooling yourself to filter out the negative neurotic thinking of the public sector unionised workforce who have been tinkering with your kids minds all day.

When i want to train a young horse, its important that you dont let idiots teach it bad lessons. it actually takes more time to unteach a bad lesson then to teach it right from scratch.

I saw some stats this morning that self harm amongst teenagers is up 100 % in the last 10 years.

this is what happens when negative neurotic systems are allowed to spread the negative neurotic contagion to young minds.

I'm sure public schools have lots of hand wringing guidance officers and school psychologists all focusing on negative thinking, self loathing and limiting beliefs.

i want my young horses and my kids to be taught in an environment where everything is based on hard work, hard play, consistency, confidence, reward for effort, challenging to break through to the next level, hero worship and unconditional positive regard.

i see these attributes in dynamic private educators.
i do not see them in toxic lefty unionised teachers who wear thongs and jeans and look beaten down.

the public sector does not take pride in itself or value itself.
i wouldnt want my legacy being tainted with this belief system.
it would require too much effort to undo all the harm that would be done.
my rightard daughter has some friends who are in young labor. they all have anxiety conditons, eating disorders, insomnia and are so easily swayed by their emotions.they seem very concerned about transgender issues and gay marriage, they dont seem very concerned with understanding the difference between a franked and an unfranked dividened.
i think they are drawn to my kids as my kids are so super confident.
like a moth to the light
and good old fashioned rightard values  are a shining light in these dark days of negative self loathing leftard socialism  ;) ;) ;)

Scoot reckons she trains horses and that is how she knows about private schools  :D :D :D

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 8:57am:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 8:47am: Swagman wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 10:28pm: If Private schools weren't better than Public schools....then there'd be no private schools.... :D You know... I've never heard anyone make that point and yet it is perhaps the most powerful argument of all. They exist because people are prepared to pay huge amounts to educate their kids privately ergo they consider them to be a lot better than public schools. Oh duh! Oooh....I forgot. This is OzPol lol the place where the bleeding obvious needs to be explained and clarified. My bad Maria  :P

Sometimes in any debate, the dead-set obvious gets overlooked. Occasionally we need to be reminded of those points.

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 9:07am:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 8:47am: Swagman wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 10:28pm: If Private schools weren't better than Public schools....then there'd be no private schools.... :D You know... I've never heard anyone make that point and yet it is perhaps the most powerful argument of all. They exists because people are prepared to pay huge amounts to educated their kids privately ergo they consider them to be a lot better than public schools. they exist because tax payer dollars prop them up .... remove the govt. money and the majority would close.

Fair point but a lot would remain open. But take the funding away from public schools and ZERO would remain. This is the province of the parents who literally complain about paying a $25pa fee for stationery in a public school and get interviewed for the newspaper about it.

Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 10:00am:

Scoot reckons she trains horses and that is how she knows about private schools  :D :D :D

Scoot knows which training methods work and which lead to an anxious schizoid and dangerous student.
Scoot knows that mindful confident and positive teaching works.
Make the wrong thing hard and the right thing easy
Reward the smallest try.
Break it down into simple steps
When the wrong thing is done, correct it with a negative consequence , immediately and with no emotion.
Be mindful that there are no bad students , only bad trainers.
If a student becomes rebellious, dangerous and is not learning, you need to take responsibility for that and modify the lessons.
Always give the struggling student an "out" .
When you ask for a result , dont stop asking until the result is produced.
Your job is to lead, you have no right being anxious or lacking in confidence as this will be transferred by the law of mood transfer.
Refresh each lesson before moving onto the next.
Good nutrition is vital
Good posture is vital
Always be the alpha
A firm touch is reassuring
Do not react to things or the fear will be transferred.
Use as little force as possible but as much force as neccessary.
Respect has to come before love.
Learn the 5 love languages that all students (and horses) respond to


acts of service
quality time
gifts
positive affirmations
physical touch

be mindful that each needs to be applied judiciously.

dont let numpties anywhere near your student/horse..they will only confuse it.

i could go on.
you only get one chance to be trained.
ive seen plenty of kids and foals ruined because they went to the wrong trainers.
;) ;) ;)

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 9:10am:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 8:47am: Swagman wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 10:28pm: If Private schools weren't better than Public schools....then there'd be no private schools.... :D You know... I've never heard anyone make that point and yet it is perhaps the most powerful argument of all. They exists because people are prepared to pay huge amounts to educated their kids privately ergo they consider them to be a lot better than public schools. a tourist traveling through Tibet stopped at an isolated monastery on a mountain top in the monastery there was a coffee shop with only two items they were coffee $2 coffee $200 when the tourist asked the monk what was the difference between the coffee's the monk said $198, yet occasionally people buy the $200 coffee because they think it must be better

Or perhaps to the enlightened, having $200 is not different to having $2, to having $0.   As they are all materialistic illusions that causes pain and suffering.  So then traveller... will you pay $2, or $200, or $2000 for the coffee, or no coffee.   :D

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 9:07am:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 8:47am: Swagman wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 10:28pm: If Private schools weren't better than Public schools....then there'd be no private schools.... :D You know... I've never heard anyone make that point and yet it is perhaps the most powerful argument of all. They exists because people are prepared to pay huge amounts to educated their kids privately ergo they consider them to be a lot better than public schools. they exist because tax payer dollars prop them up .... remove the govt. money and the majority would close.

....and then the taxpayer would have to fork out billions more education dollars each year to educate the exodus of private school children to the public system.  :o

Private schools actually save the Govt (tax-payer) billions every year.  IRONICALLY the quality of education in public schools is enhanced by the existence of Private schools, due to the fact that the Govt has more  Education dollars in its budget.  :-?

Swagman wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 11:49am:

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 9:07am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 8:47am: Swagman wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 10:28pm: If Private schools weren't better than Public schools....then there'd be no private schools.... :D You know... I've never heard anyone make that point and yet it is perhaps the most powerful argument of all. They exists because people are prepared to pay huge amounts to educated their kids privately ergo they consider them to be a lot better than public schools. they exist because tax payer dollars prop them up .... remove the govt. money and the majority would close. ....and then the taxpayer would have to fork out billions more education dollars each year to educate the exodus of private school children to the public system.  :o Private schools actually save the Govt (tax-payer) billions every year.  IRONICALLY the quality of education in public schools is enhanced by the existence of Private schools, due to the fact that the Govt has more  Education dollars in its budget.  :-?

Watch the poverty-mindset lefties absolutely disagree with everything you say and provide absolutely no proof to support it.

tickleandrose wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 11:38am:

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 9:10am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 8:47am: Swagman wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 10:28pm: If Private schools weren't better than Public schools....then there'd be no private schools.... :D You know... I've never heard anyone make that point and yet it is perhaps the most powerful argument of all. They exists because people are prepared to pay huge amounts to educated their kids privately ergo they consider them to be a lot better than public schools. a tourist traveling through Tibet stopped at an isolated monastery on a mountain top in the monastery there was a coffee shop with only two items they were coffee $2 coffee $200 when the tourist asked the monk what was the difference between the coffee's the monk said $198, yet occasionally people buy the $200 coffee because they think it must be better   Or perhaps to the enlightened, having $200 is not different to having $2, to having $0.   As they are all materialistic illusions that causes pain and suffering.  So then traveller... will you pay $2, or $200, or $2000 for the coffee, or no coffee.   :D

who said he was enlightened? they use the apprentices to do the hard work, the enlightened ones sit on their pillows and uuhhhmmmmm  :D :D :D

Swagman wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 11:49am:

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 9:07am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 8:47am: Swagman wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 10:28pm: If Private schools weren't better than Public schools....then there'd be no private schools.... :D You know... I've never heard anyone make that point and yet it is perhaps the most powerful argument of all. They exists because people are prepared to pay huge amounts to educated their kids privately ergo they consider them to be a lot better than public schools. they exist because tax payer dollars prop them up .... remove the govt. money and the majority would close. ....and then the taxpayer would have to fork out billions more education dollars each year to educate the exodus of private school children to the public system.  :o Private schools actually save the Govt (tax-payer) billions every year.  IRONICALLY the quality of education in public schools is enhanced by the existence of Private schools, due to the fact that the Govt has more  Education dollars in its budget.  :-?

did you disagree with my comment Swag? As for your 'private schools save' bullshit, the only ones to claim that are the private schools themselves.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 11:53am:

Swagman wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 11:49am: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 9:07am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 8:47am: Swagman wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 10:28pm: If Private schools weren't better than Public schools....then there'd be no private schools.... :D You know... I've never heard anyone make that point and yet it is perhaps the most powerful argument of all. They exists because people are prepared to pay huge amounts to educated their kids privately ergo they consider them to be a lot better than public schools. they exist because tax payer dollars prop them up .... remove the govt. money and the majority would close. ....and then the taxpayer would have to fork out billions more education dollars each year to educate the exodus of private school children to the public system.  :o Private schools actually save the Govt (tax-payer) billions every year.  IRONICALLY the quality of education in public schools is enhanced by the existence of Private schools, due to the fact that the Govt has more  Education dollars in its budget.  :-? Watch the poverty-mindset lefties absolutely disagree with everything you say and provide absolutely no proof to support it.

Did you see any proof that private schools save the govt. money? Or do you deliberately strive for hypocrisy with each and every comment?

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 1:49pm:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 11:53am: Swagman wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 11:49am: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 9:07am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 8:47am: Swagman wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 10:28pm: If Private schools weren't better than Public schools....then there'd be no private schools.... :D You know... I've never heard anyone make that point and yet it is perhaps the most powerful argument of all. They exists because people are prepared to pay huge amounts to educated their kids privately ergo they consider them to be a lot better than public schools. they exist because tax payer dollars prop them up .... remove the govt. money and the majority would close. ....and then the taxpayer would have to fork out billions more education dollars each year to educate the exodus of private school children to the public system.  :o Private schools actually save the Govt (tax-payer) billions every year.  IRONICALLY the quality of education in public schools is enhanced by the existence of Private schools, due to the fact that the Govt has more  Education dollars in its budget.  :-? Watch the poverty-mindset lefties absolutely disagree with everything you say and provide absolutely no proof to support it. Did you see any proof that private schools save the govt. money? Or do you deliberately strive for hypocrisy with each and every comment?

That private schools saves the government enormous sums of money is not up for dispute except by the crazy left and loons like yourself. The argument is so simple even you could follow it. And here it is: the government provides 30% LESS per private student than public student. Now explain why spending less is actually spending more. I am sure you will find a way.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 2:07pm:

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 1:49pm: mariacostel wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 11:53am: Swagman wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 11:49am: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 9:07am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 8:47am: Swagman wrote on Oct 6th, 2015 at 10:28pm: If Private schools weren't better than Public schools....then there'd be no private schools.... :D You know... I've never heard anyone make that point and yet it is perhaps the most powerful argument of all. They exists because people are prepared to pay huge amounts to educated their kids privately ergo they consider them to be a lot better than public schools. they exist because tax payer dollars prop them up .... remove the govt. money and the majority would close. ....and then the taxpayer would have to fork out billions more education dollars each year to educate the exodus of private school children to the public system.  :o Private schools actually save the Govt (tax-payer) billions every year.  IRONICALLY the quality of education in public schools is enhanced by the existence of Private schools, due to the fact that the Govt has more  Education dollars in its budget.  :-? Watch the poverty-mindset lefties absolutely disagree with everything you say and provide absolutely no proof to support it. Did you see any proof that private schools save the govt. money? Or do you deliberately strive for hypocrisy with each and every comment? That private schools saves the government enormous sums of money is not up for dispute except by the crazy left and loons like yourself. The argument is so simple even you could follow it. And here it is: the government provides 30% LESS per private student than public student. Now explain why spending less is actually spending more. I am sure you will find a way.

so no proof then?  :D :D :D  thanks for playing

private schools do not recieve as much taxpayer money per student as public schools,

this fact is indisputable.

a grade 1 student in a private school can therefore do the maths and state that private schools save the government money.

a grade 3 student in a public school can also do the maths and say that private schools save the government money

aquascoot wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 2:11pm:

private schools do not recieve as much taxpayer money per student as public schools, this fact is indisputable. a grade 1 student in a private school can therefore do the maths and state that private schools save the government money. a grade 3 student in a public school can also do the maths and say that private schools save the government money

But John Smith cannot. A better advertisement for private schooling could not be found other then the publicly schooled JS.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 2:21pm:

aquascoot wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 2:11pm: private schools do not recieve as much taxpayer money per student as public schools, this fact is indisputable. a grade 1 student in a private school can therefore do the maths and state that private schools save the government money. a grade 3 student in a public school can also do the maths and say that private schools save the government money But John Smith cannot. A better advertisement for private schooling could not be found other then the publicly schooled JS.

just think, you could have spent that time supporting your claim ... if you'd had a public schooling you probably would have

instead you just made yourself look like a bigger dumbarse than normal  ;D ;D ;D

aquascoot wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 2:11pm:

private schools do not recieve as much taxpayer money per student as public schools, this fact is indisputable.

who's disputing it?

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 2:27pm:

aquascoot wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 2:11pm: private schools do not recieve as much taxpayer money per student as public schools, this fact is indisputable. who's disputing it?

You.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 2:31pm:

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 2:27pm: aquascoot wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 2:11pm: private schools do not recieve as much taxpayer money per student as public schools, this fact is indisputable. who's disputing it? You.

where did I do that?

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 2:33pm:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 2:31pm: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 2:27pm: aquascoot wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 2:11pm: private schools do not recieve as much taxpayer money per student as public schools, this fact is indisputable. who's disputing it? You. where did I do that?

You really are a gaslight in an electric world, aren't you?

mariacostel wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 2:36pm:

You really are a gaslight in an electric world, aren't you?

so you couldn't find evidence of that either?

You're really not having a good day are you? perhaps if you read slower, that might help you!


You know, I've just realised who you remind me of, she was always full of herself too.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/82/9c/4f/829c4f78a960fcadcec25e4156610b78.jpg

I thought I would do some research since most posters on this forum do not back up their bullshit with any independent evidence....

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/how-privilege-rules-over-school-funding-20130428-2imiu.html

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/private-school-funding-grows-23pc-public-schools-125pc/story-fn59nlz9-1227429555177?sv=191544d5ee7a3865b4394b749f3de724

http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2015/03/25/australia-follow-chiles-lead-stop-funding-private-schools/

http://www.uow.edu.au/~nillsen/schoolsfundingpiece.pdf

Now if someone wants to make a claim back it up!!!

>:( >:( >:(

Sending Children To Private Or Public Schools

Yes I would highly recommend one or the other.

....

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 6:15pm:

I thought I would do some research since most posters on this forum do not back up their bullshit with any independent evidence.... http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/how-privilege-rules-over-school-funding-20130428-2imiu.html http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/private-school-funding-grows-23pc-public-schools-125pc/story-fn59nlz9-1227429555177?sv=191544d5ee7a3865b4394b749f3de724 http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2015/03/25/australia-follow-chiles-lead-stop-funding-private-schools/ http://www.uow.edu.au/~nillsen/schoolsfundingpiece.pdf Now if someone wants to make a claim back it up!!! >:( >:( >:(

Thanks Phil.  The new daily article is particularly informative.  Well worth the read.  This is the part in the discussion where Longy, seeing the writing on the wall, starts making up facts. It's soo funny to watch.   

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 6:49pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 6:15pm: I thought I would do some research since most posters on this forum do not back up their bullshit with any independent evidence.... http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/how-privilege-rules-over-school-funding-20130428-2imiu.html http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/private-school-funding-grows-23pc-public-schools-125pc/story-fn59nlz9-1227429555177?sv=191544d5ee7a3865b4394b749f3de724 http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2015/03/25/australia-follow-chiles-lead-stop-funding-private-schools/ http://www.uow.edu.au/~nillsen/schoolsfundingpiece.pdf Now if someone wants to make a claim back it up!!! >:( >:( >:( Thanks Phil.  The new daily article is particularly informative.  Well worth the read.  This is the part in the discussion where Longy, seeing the writing on the wall, starts making up facts. It's soo funny to watch.

No worries Sparta....

Some of the best private schools in the world receive no public funding what so ever....The UK and USA do not spend one cent of public money on private schools....Australia is unique in funding an inequitable education system...John Howard is a runt who saw the biggest diversion of public money go to well off individuals in Australia's history....Time for this bullshit to stop!!!

>:( >:( >:(

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 6:15pm:

I thought I would do some research since most posters on this forum do not back up their bullshit with any independent evidence.... http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/how-privilege-rules-over-school-funding-20130428-2imiu.html http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/private-school-funding-grows-23pc-public-schools-125pc/story-fn59nlz9-1227429555177?sv=191544d5ee7a3865b4394b749f3de724 http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2015/03/25/australia-follow-chiles-lead-stop-funding-private-schools/ http://www.uow.edu.au/~nillsen/schoolsfundingpiece.pdf Now if someone wants to make a claim back it up!!! >:( >:( >:(

When trying to make any point it is always important to use statistics out of context so as to look credible while in fact lying. Private school funding has grown a lot faster than public school funding. That's true. Shock! Horror! What of course is missing is the fact that private school attendances are growing far faster than public schools. We call this an 'inconvenient truth'.

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 6:49pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 6:15pm: I thought I would do some research since most posters on this forum do not back up their bullshit with any independent evidence.... http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/how-privilege-rules-over-school-funding-20130428-2imiu.html http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/private-school-funding-grows-23pc-public-schools-125pc/story-fn59nlz9-1227429555177?sv=191544d5ee7a3865b4394b749f3de724 http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2015/03/25/australia-follow-chiles-lead-stop-funding-private-schools/ http://www.uow.edu.au/~nillsen/schoolsfundingpiece.pdf Now if someone wants to make a claim back it up!!! >:( >:( >:( Thanks Phil.  The new daily article is particularly informative.  Well worth the read.  This is the part in the discussion where Longy, seeing the writing on the wall, starts making up facts. It's soo funny to watch.

I love the article about Chile because they have an education system that is so globally renowned...

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 6:15pm:

I thought I would do some research since most posters on this forum do not back up their bullshit with any independent evidence.... http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/how-privilege-rules-over-school-funding-20130428-2imiu.html http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/private-school-funding-grows-23pc-public-schools-125pc/story-fn59nlz9-1227429555177?sv=191544d5ee7a3865b4394b749f3de724 http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2015/03/25/australia-follow-chiles-lead-stop-funding-private-schools/ http://www.uow.edu.au/~nillsen/schoolsfundingpiece.pdf Now if someone wants to make a claim back it up!!! >:( >:( >:(

thanks Phil ...

mariacostel wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 7:34pm:

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 6:49pm: philperth2010 wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 6:15pm: I thought I would do some research since most posters on this forum do not back up their bullshit with any independent evidence.... http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/how-privilege-rules-over-school-funding-20130428-2imiu.html http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/private-school-funding-grows-23pc-public-schools-125pc/story-fn59nlz9-1227429555177?sv=191544d5ee7a3865b4394b749f3de724 http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2015/03/25/australia-follow-chiles-lead-stop-funding-private-schools/ http://www.uow.edu.au/~nillsen/schoolsfundingpiece.pdf Now if someone wants to make a claim back it up!!! >:( >:( >:( Thanks Phil.  The new daily article is particularly informative.  Well worth the read.  This is the part in the discussion where Longy, seeing the writing on the wall, starts making up facts. It's soo funny to watch.    I love the article about Chile because they have an education system that is so globally renowned...

that's your argument? a cheap shot at chille? ;D ;D ;D ;D

mariacostel wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 7:32pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 6:15pm: I thought I would do some research since most posters on this forum do not back up their bullshit with any independent evidence.... http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/how-privilege-rules-over-school-funding-20130428-2imiu.html http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/private-school-funding-grows-23pc-public-schools-125pc/story-fn59nlz9-1227429555177?sv=191544d5ee7a3865b4394b749f3de724 http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2015/03/25/australia-follow-chiles-lead-stop-funding-private-schools/ http://www.uow.edu.au/~nillsen/schoolsfundingpiece.pdf Now if someone wants to make a claim back it up!!! >:( >:( >:( When trying to make any point it is always important to use statistics out of context so as to look credible while in fact lying. Private school funding has grown a lot faster than public school funding. That's true. Shock! Horror! What of course is missing is the fact that private school attendances are growing far faster than public schools. We call this an 'inconvenient truth'.

you could always provide proof that funding private schools saves money?

Dnarever wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 6:26pm:

Sending Children To Private Or Public Schools Yes I would highly recommend one or the other.

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

.....

mariacostel wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 7:32pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 6:15pm: I thought I would do some research since most posters on this forum do not back up their bullshit with any independent evidence.... http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/how-privilege-rules-over-school-funding-20130428-2imiu.html http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/private-school-funding-grows-23pc-public-schools-125pc/story-fn59nlz9-1227429555177?sv=191544d5ee7a3865b4394b749f3de724 http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2015/03/25/australia-follow-chiles-lead-stop-funding-private-schools/ http://www.uow.edu.au/~nillsen/schoolsfundingpiece.pdf Now if someone wants to make a claim back it up!!! >:( >:( >:( When trying to make any point it is always important to use statistics out of context so as to look credible while in fact lying. Private school funding has grown a lot faster than public school funding. That's true. Shock! Horror! What of course is missing is the fact that private school attendances are growing far faster than public schools. We call this an 'inconvenient truth'.

And the relevance of that is what? It certainly says nothing about the quality of education that students are getting at private schools compared to public schools and it certainly doesn't justify diverting public education funds to private schools.  If you want to send your kids to private schools fine but you should pay for it instead of leeching off the taxpayer to fund your elitism.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 7:32pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 6:15pm: I thought I would do some research since most posters on this forum do not back up their bullshit with any independent evidence.... http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/how-privilege-rules-over-school-funding-20130428-2imiu.html http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/private-school-funding-grows-23pc-public-schools-125pc/story-fn59nlz9-1227429555177?sv=191544d5ee7a3865b4394b749f3de724 http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2015/03/25/australia-follow-chiles-lead-stop-funding-private-schools/ http://www.uow.edu.au/~nillsen/schoolsfundingpiece.pdf Now if someone wants to make a claim back it up!!! >:( >:( >:( When trying to make any point it is always important to use statistics out of context so as to look credible while in fact lying. Private school funding has grown a lot faster than public school funding. That's true. Shock! Horror! What of course is missing is the fact that private school attendances are growing far faster than public schools. We call this an 'inconvenient truth'.

Where was I lying???

Where is your supporting evidence for your claim???

When trying to make any point it is always important to tell the truth to be credible!!!

[smiley=lolk.gif] [smiley=lolk.gif] [smiley=lolk.gif]

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Oct 7^th, 2015 at 8:01pm:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 7:32pm: philperth2010 wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 6:15pm: I thought I would do some research since most posters on this forum do not back up their bullshit with any independent evidence.... http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/how-privilege-rules-over-school-funding-20130428-2imiu.html http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/private-school-funding-grows-23pc-public-schools-125pc/story-fn59nlz9-1227429555177?sv=191544d5ee7a3865b4394b749f3de724 http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2015/03/25/australia-follow-chiles-lead-stop-funding-private-schools/ http://www.uow.edu.au/~nillsen/schoolsfundingpiece.pdf Now if someone wants to make a claim back it up!!! >:( >:( >:( When trying to make any point it is always important to use statistics out of context so as to look credible while in fact lying. Private school funding has grown a lot faster than public school funding. That's true. Shock! Horror! What of course is missing is the fact that private school attendances are growing far faster than public schools. We call this an 'inconvenient truth'. And the relevance of that is what? It certainly says nothing about the quality of education that students are getting at private schools compared to public schools and it certainly doesn't justify diverting public education funds to private schools.  If you want to send your kids to private schools fine but you should pay for it instead of leeching off the taxpayer to fund your elitism.

yawn,  since the government spends LESS per student in the private sector then the public sector, it is simply impossible to say that private schools are leeching off taxpayers,  they are , in fact, saving taxpayers a fortune as each child in a private school costs the taxpayer LESS then if they were in a public school.
Can the leftards acknowledge this as a fact please.

after acknowledging this, anyone who again says that private school are a drain on the education system really reveals themselves as someone who did not go to a private or public school , but instead went to a special school.

this means you spartacus and john smith, now admit the error in your remedial maths and then we can move forward  ;)

I quite liked the analogy in one of Phils links ....

the govt. should subsidise my car expenses because it's cheaper than having to provide me with public transport.

Scoot, you are doing the same crap Swag does with his claims on penalty rates, you claim it saves money but haven't provided evidence of it.

DO you think if the govt. stopped subsidising private schools they will cease to exist? If so, So much for your claim that they provide a better education  :D :D :D :D

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 8:00am:

I quite liked the analogy in one of Phils links .... the govt. should subsidise my car expenses because it's cheaper than having to provide me with public transport. Scoot, you are doing the same crap Swag does with his claims on penalty rates, you claim it saves money but haven't provided evidence of it. DO you think if the govt. stopped subsidising private schools they will cease to exist? If so, So much for your claim that they provide a better education  :D :D :D :D

God you're full of $hit sometimes.

If one of your kids obtained a scholarship to attend a good private school.....would you refuse it? Yes or no?

Be careful how you answer....otherwise a certain psychiatrist who quickly popped in last night over at PA might be needed. ::)

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 8:00am:

I quite liked the analogy in one of Phils links .... the govt. should subsidise my car expenses because it's cheaper than having to provide me with public transport. Scoot, you are doing the same crap Swag does with his claims on penalty rates, you claim it saves money but haven't provided evidence of it. DO you think if the govt. stopped subsidising private schools they will cease to exist? If so, So much for your claim that they provide a better education  :D :D :D :D

John, education is compulsory.
parents of private school children make a significant contribution to relieve the burden on the taxpayer.
If they chose to avail themselves of the public system, then the taxpayer would have to pick up this additional burden.

A better analogy is someone who rents privately and gets $40 a week rent assistance as opposed to someone who is in public housing and gets their house at a cost to the taxpayer that might be 3 or 4 times this.

the private renter is not bludging on the system . they are saving the system a fortune.

And it is the same for the wonderful people who send their children to private schools and make a financial contribution to assist the taxpayer. Simply marvellous australians. and a lot of them do it with great personal self sacrifice, giving up the foxtel and pokies and alcohol and smokes which the parents of public school students see as more of a priority.
How pitiful  ;)

aquascoot wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 6:44am:

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 8:01pm: mariacostel wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 7:32pm: philperth2010 wrote on Oct 7th, 2015 at 6:15pm: I thought I would do some research since most posters on this forum do not back up their bullshit with any independent evidence.... http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/how-privilege-rules-over-school-funding-20130428-2imiu.html http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/private-school-funding-grows-23pc-public-schools-125pc/story-fn59nlz9-1227429555177?sv=191544d5ee7a3865b4394b749f3de724 http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2015/03/25/australia-follow-chiles-lead-stop-funding-private-schools/ http://www.uow.edu.au/~nillsen/schoolsfundingpiece.pdf Now if someone wants to make a claim back it up!!! >:( >:( >:( When trying to make any point it is always important to use statistics out of context so as to look credible while in fact lying. Private school funding has grown a lot faster than public school funding. That's true. Shock! Horror! What of course is missing is the fact that private school attendances are growing far faster than public schools. We call this an 'inconvenient truth'. And the relevance of that is what? It certainly says nothing about the quality of education that students are getting at private schools compared to public schools and it certainly doesn't justify diverting public education funds to private schools.  If you want to send your kids to private schools fine but you should pay for it instead of leeching off the taxpayer to fund your elitism. yawn,  since the government spends LESS per student in the private sector then the public sector, it is simply impossible to say that private schools are leeching off taxpayers,  they are , in fact, saving taxpayers a fortune as each child in a private school costs the taxpayer LESS then if they were in a public school. Can the leftards acknowledge this as a fact please. after acknowledging this, anyone who again says that private school are a drain on the education system really reveals themselves as someone who did not go to a private or public school , but instead went to a special school. this means you spartacus and john smith, now admit the error in your remedial maths and then we can move forward  ;)

Your post doesn't address anything that I said even though it purports to.  Also there is an issue of economies of scale that you are ignoring.  First, the public school education budget should only go to public schools, instead much of that budget is being given away to private schools where only an exclusive part of the community can benefit. You dont have to be Einstein to know that that's bordering on criminal.  Also if that money went back to the public schools why wouldn't it more then cover whatever extra costs are incurred by the return of "some" private school students, especially much of the infrastructure of public schools will be there (economies of scale). Of course you pretend there will be a stampede back to the private sector and I very much doubt that given the near psychotic need of people like you, Scoot and Longy to feel you're above the herd. If you want private education you pay for it instead of leeching off the rest of us to meet the cost for you.         

.....

aquascoot wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 8:10am:

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 8:00am: I quite liked the analogy in one of Phils links .... the govt. should subsidise my car expenses because it's cheaper than having to provide me with public transport. Scoot, you are doing the same crap Swag does with his claims on penalty rates, you claim it saves money but haven't provided evidence of it. DO you think if the govt. stopped subsidising private schools they will cease to exist? If so, So much for your claim that they provide a better education  :D :D :D :D John, education is compulsory. parents of private school children make a significant contribution to relieve the burden on the taxpayer. If they chose to avail themselves of the public system, then the taxpayer would have to pick up this additional burden. A better analogy is someone who rents privately and gets $40 a week rent assistance as opposed to someone who is in public housing and gets their house at a cost to the taxpayer that might be 3 or 4 times this. the private renter is not bludging on the system . they are saving the system a fortune. And it is the same for the wonderful people who send their children to private schools and make a financial contribution to assist the taxpayer. Simply marvellous australians. and a lot of them do it with great personal self sacrifice, giving up the foxtel and pokies and alcohol and smokes which the parents of public school students see as more of a priority. How pitiful  ;)

Total cr@p. They dont make a contribution, rather the opposite. They drain public funds and redirect them to pay for their private costs.   

aquascoot wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 8:10am:

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 8:00am: I quite liked the analogy in one of Phils links .... the govt. should subsidise my car expenses because it's cheaper than having to provide me with public transport. Scoot, you are doing the same crap Swag does with his claims on penalty rates, you claim it saves money but haven't provided evidence of it. DO you think if the govt. stopped subsidising private schools they will cease to exist? If so, So much for your claim that they provide a better education  :D :D :D :D John, education is compulsory. so is transport. Most people can't survive locked up in their houses with no transport of any kind. parents of private school children make a significant contribution to relieve the burden on the taxpayer. If they chose to avail themselves of the public system, then the taxpayer would have to pick up this additional burden. wrong, if those parents wanted to relieve the taxpayer, they wouldn't ask the govt. to subsidise their decision. Not everyone in private education will go to the public system. People like you and Maria would never dare let your kids mingle with the common folk. A better analogy is someone who rents privately and gets $40 a week rent assistance as opposed to someone who is in public housing and gets their house at a cost to the taxpayer that might be 3 or 4 times this. you can't pretend the $40 rent assistance available to few is the same as private school funding? the private renter is not bludging on the system . they are saving the system a fortune. renting is not compulsory And it is the same for the wonderful people who send their children to private schools and make a financial contribution to assist the taxpayer. Simply marvellous australians. and a lot of them do it with great personal self sacrifice, giving up the foxtel and pokies and alcohol and smokes which the parents of public school students see as more of a priority. such wonderful people, pay $30k in tax and claim back $40  :D :D :D :D How pitiful  ;) I agree

now that you've got you spiel out of the way, why don't you concentrate on proving your claim that funding private education saves taxpayers money?

aquascoot wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 8:10am:

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 8:00am: I quite liked the analogy in one of Phils links .... the govt. should subsidise my car expenses because it's cheaper than having to provide me with public transport. Scoot, you are doing the same crap Swag does with his claims on penalty rates, you claim it saves money but haven't provided evidence of it. DO you think if the govt. stopped subsidising private schools they will cease to exist? If so, So much for your claim that they provide a better education  :D :D :D :D John, education is compulsory. parents of private school children make a significant contribution to relieve the burden on the taxpayer. If they chose to avail themselves of the public system, then the taxpayer would have to pick up this additional burden. A better analogy is someone who rents privately and gets $40 a week rent assistance as opposed to someone who is in public housing and gets their house at a cost to the taxpayer that might be 3 or 4 times this. the private renter is not bludging on the system . they are saving the system a fortune. And it is the same for the wonderful people who send their children to private schools and make a financial contribution to assist the taxpayer. Simply marvellous australians. and a lot of them do it with great personal self sacrifice, giving up the foxtel and pokies and alcohol and smokes which the parents of public school students see as more of a priority. How pitiful  ;)

Please support your claim, particularly with regard to the numbers you assume will return to the public sector and the savings the public sector will make from not having to gift public funds to private schools.

Also the elitism evidenced by the highlighted part of your post demonstrates clearly why you should never be subsidised to bring your children up in the repugnant manner that you were or wish you were.  Pay for it yourself. 

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 8:09am:

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 8:00am: I quite liked the analogy in one of Phils links .... the govt. should subsidise my car expenses because it's cheaper than having to provide me with public transport. Scoot, you are doing the same crap Swag does with his claims on penalty rates, you claim it saves money but haven't provided evidence of it. DO you think if the govt. stopped subsidising private schools they will cease to exist? If so, So much for your claim that they provide a better education  :D :D :D :D God you're full of $hit sometimes. If one of your kids obtained a scholarship to attend a good private school.....would you refuse it? Yes or no? Be careful how you answer....otherwise a certain psychiatrist who quickly popped in last night over at PA might be needed. ::)

Same question applies to Sparty.

Quote:

wrong, if those parents wanted to relieve the taxpayer, they wouldn't ask the govt. to subsidise their decision. Not everyone in private education will go to the public system. People like you and Maria would never dare let your kids mingle with the common folk.

The government have a duty to provide funding for every child not just some.

The negative limiting beliefs of the lefties are certainly a good reason to keep your children out of the public school mix.

spartacus thinks there is something terrible about wanting to be elite.

Jonathon Thurston is elite
Adam Scott is elite.
Roger Fedderer is elite.

There is nothing wrong with aiming to be elite.
There would appear to be something wrong with aiming to be mediocre though  ;) ;) ;)

How pitiful

....

Steampipe wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 9:23am:

Quote: wrong, if those parents wanted to relieve the taxpayer, they wouldn't ask the govt. to subsidise their decision. Not everyone in private education will go to the public system. People like you and Maria would never dare let your kids mingle with the common folk. The government have a duty to provide funding for every child not just some.

Yes thats why we have a public school system.  If you choose not to avail yourself of that, its your choice but then you should pay for it. 

....

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 9:21am:

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 8:09am: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 8:00am: I quite liked the analogy in one of Phils links .... the govt. should subsidise my car expenses because it's cheaper than having to provide me with public transport. Scoot, you are doing the same crap Swag does with his claims on penalty rates, you claim it saves money but haven't provided evidence of it. DO you think if the govt. stopped subsidising private schools they will cease to exist? If so, So much for your claim that they provide a better education  :D :D :D :D God you're full of $hit sometimes. If one of your kids obtained a scholarship to attend a good private school.....would you refuse it? Yes or no? Be careful how you answer....otherwise a certain psychiatrist who quickly popped in last night over at PA might be needed. ::) Same question applies to Sparty.

Im not sure what that question has to do with anything but I can tell you that the scholarship would have no lour for me whatsoever and as a matter of principle I would decline it confident in the knowledge that I have as good a chance of securing my child a good education in the public school as they would get in the private school.  The other downside of course is that if we accepted the scholarship my kids would probably turn into spoon fed unthinking, simple minded  elitists who I would probably not wish to associate with, and my kids are far more important to me then that. 

aquascoot wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 9:32am:

The negative limiting beliefs of the lefties are certainly a good reason to keep your children out of the public school mix. spartacus thinks there is something terrible about wanting to be elite. Jonathon Thurston is elite Adam Scott is elite. Roger Fedderer is elite. There is nothing wrong with aiming to be elite. There would appear to be something wrong with aiming to be mediocre though  ;) ;) ;) How pitiful

I think, like your horses, your very hung up about elites and hierarchy. It's a very primitive way of looking at things and at life.  If science is teaching us anything its that everything has value in its different way and that no one thing is truly more valuable then the other because we are all interrelated and interdependent.  You look at the world in your backward way, like your horses, because its easier to see life in black and white and because your primal impulses are overcome by the glitter of fame and wealth and as a consequence you overlook most of the value of life. 

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 9:21am:

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 8:09am: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 8:00am: I quite liked the analogy in one of Phils links .... the govt. should subsidise my car expenses because it's cheaper than having to provide me with public transport. Scoot, you are doing the same crap Swag does with his claims on penalty rates, you claim it saves money but haven't provided evidence of it. DO you think if the govt. stopped subsidising private schools they will cease to exist? If so, So much for your claim that they provide a better education  :D :D :D :D God you're full of $hit sometimes. If one of your kids obtained a scholarship to attend a good private school.....would you refuse it? Yes or no? Be careful how you answer....otherwise a certain psychiatrist who quickly popped in last night over at PA might be needed. ::) Same question applies to Sparty.

Neither poster can answer such a simple question.

Wonder why?

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 9:02am:

aquascoot wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 8:10am: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 8:00am: I quite liked the analogy in one of Phils links .... the govt. should subsidise my car expenses because it's cheaper than having to provide me with public transport. Scoot, you are doing the same crap Swag does with his claims on penalty rates, you claim it saves money but haven't provided evidence of it. DO you think if the govt. stopped subsidising private schools they will cease to exist? If so, So much for your claim that they provide a better education  :D :D :D :D John, education is compulsory. parents of private school children make a significant contribution to relieve the burden on the taxpayer. If they chose to avail themselves of the public system, then the taxpayer would have to pick up this additional burden. A better analogy is someone who rents privately and gets $40 a week rent assistance as opposed to someone who is in public housing and gets their house at a cost to the taxpayer that might be 3 or 4 times this. the private renter is not bludging on the system . they are saving the system a fortune. And it is the same for the wonderful people who send their children to private schools and make a financial contribution to assist the taxpayer. Simply marvellous australians. and a lot of them do it with great personal self sacrifice, giving up the foxtel and pokies and alcohol and smokes which the parents of public school students see as more of a priority. How pitiful  ;) Total cr@p. They dont make a contribution, rather the opposite. They drain public funds and redirect them to pay for their private costs.

You are not getting the point. The government has two educational options: pay $11,000pa to a public student or $8,000 to a private student. Now on what planet is that COSTING the government money? Because if they withdrew the private funding the majority of private students would revert to public and cost more. Why do you think left-wingers like Gillard didn't get rid of this funding? Because despite her ideology, the system SAVES $10B-12B a year to the government.

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 9:21am:

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 8:09am: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 8:00am: I quite liked the analogy in one of Phils links .... the govt. should subsidise my car expenses because it's cheaper than having to provide me with public transport. Scoot, you are doing the same crap Swag does with his claims on penalty rates, you claim it saves money but haven't provided evidence of it. DO you think if the govt. stopped subsidising private schools they will cease to exist? If so, So much for your claim that they provide a better education  :D :D :D :D God you're full of $hit sometimes. If one of your kids obtained a scholarship to attend a good private school.....would you refuse it? Yes or no? Be careful how you answer....otherwise a certain psychiatrist who quickly popped in last night over at PA might be needed. ::) Same question applies to Sparty.

If it was a good school that I liked, of course I would. What has a scholarship got to do with it?

Steampipe wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 9:23am:

Quote: wrong, if those parents wanted to relieve the taxpayer, they wouldn't ask the govt. to subsidise their decision. Not everyone in private education will go to the public system. People like you and Maria would never dare let your kids mingle with the common folk. The government have a duty to provide funding for every child not just some.

no, the govt. has a duty to provide a basic service. It is up to you to chose to use it or use a different one. 

We are virtually the only developed country that funds private schools.

aquascoot wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 9:32am:

The negative limiting beliefs of the lefties are certainly a good reason to keep your children out of the public school mix. spartacus thinks there is something terrible about wanting to be elite. Jonathon Thurston is elite Adam Scott is elite. Roger Fedderer is elite. There is nothing wrong with aiming to be elite. There would appear to be something wrong with aiming to be mediocre though  ;) ;) ;) How pitiful

who said there was anything wrong with aiming to be elite? Jonathon Thurston doesn't receive govt. fund, neither does Fedderer nor Scott. You want to be elite, you fund it.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 11:02am:

Because if they withdrew the private funding the majority of private students would revert to public and cost more

making crap up again? The UK doesn't fund private schools and their private schools are full. The USA doesn't fund theirs either and they have waiting lists . You cannot argue that it will cost more until you can show the majority will switch. I don't believe they will, people like you and scoot would never send your kids with the commoners. You know the saying, a fool and their money .... and there is no shortage of fools, as you keep proving with just about every post.

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 11:20am:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:02am: Because if they withdrew the private funding the majority of private students would revert to public and cost more making crap up again? The UK doesn't fund private schools and their private schools are full. The USA doesn't fund theirs either and they have waiting lists . You cannot argue that it will cost more until you can show the majority will switch. I don't believe they will, people like you and scoot would never send your kids with the commoners. You know the saying, a fool and their money .... and there is no shortage of fools, as you keep proving with just about every post.

The vast number of private schools in Australia are low-fee ones ie paying $2000-$3000 per student. The parents are not wealthy. But if you remove government funding and that suddenly becomes $10,000 - $11,000 per student the majority would have no choice but to return to the public system where the government will be out of pocket $3K for each kid.

You maintain ideology, but the government sees it as a way of saving money and a very good one at that.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 11:37am:

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:20am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:02am: Because if they withdrew the private funding the majority of private students would revert to public and cost more making crap up again? The UK doesn't fund private schools and their private schools are full. The USA doesn't fund theirs either and they have waiting lists . You cannot argue that it will cost more until you can show the majority will switch. I don't believe they will, people like you and scoot would never send your kids with the commoners. You know the saying, a fool and their money .... and there is no shortage of fools, as you keep proving with just about every post. The vast number of private schools in Australia are low-fee ones ie paying $2000-$3000 per student. The parents are not wealthy. But if you remove government funding and that suddenly becomes $10,000 - $11,000 per student the majority would have no choice but to return to the public system where the government will be out of pocket $3K for each kid. You maintain ideology, but the government sees it as a way of saving money and a very good one at that.

Thought the figures would be higher than that Maria.

But yeah...the private school system does help out. Just look at the equation in terms of their portion in provision of infrastructure alone.

It is obscene that taxpayers fund some of the wealthiest schools in the country.

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 11:48am:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:37am: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:20am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:02am: Because if they withdrew the private funding the majority of private students would revert to public and cost more making crap up again? The UK doesn't fund private schools and their private schools are full. The USA doesn't fund theirs either and they have waiting lists . You cannot argue that it will cost more until you can show the majority will switch. I don't believe they will, people like you and scoot would never send your kids with the commoners. You know the saying, a fool and their money .... and there is no shortage of fools, as you keep proving with just about every post. The vast number of private schools in Australia are low-fee ones ie paying $2000-$3000 per student. The parents are not wealthy. But if you remove government funding and that suddenly becomes $10,000 - $11,000 per student the majority would have no choice but to return to the public system where the government will be out of pocket $3K for each kid. You maintain ideology, but the government sees it as a way of saving money and a very good one at that. Thought the figures would be higher than that Maria. But yeah...the private school system does help out. Just look at the equation in terms of their portion in provision of infrastructure alone.

The Catholic and Christian private schools are almost all low-fee. Whenever the subject comes up the media and other commentators focus on the handful of truly elite an very-expensive schools while ignoring the vast number of others.

The opposition to private schools is based on envy or ideology, never on outcomes or pragmatism.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 11:37am:

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:20am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:02am: Because if they withdrew the private funding the majority of private students would revert to public and cost more making crap up again? The UK doesn't fund private schools and their private schools are full. The USA doesn't fund theirs either and they have waiting lists . You cannot argue that it will cost more until you can show the majority will switch. I don't believe they will, people like you and scoot would never send your kids with the commoners. You know the saying, a fool and their money .... and there is no shortage of fools, as you keep proving with just about every post. The vast number of private schools in Australia are low-fee ones ie paying $2000-$3000 per student. The parents are not wealthy. But if you remove government funding and that suddenly becomes $10,000 - $11,000 per student the majority would have no choice but to return to the public system where the government will be out of pocket $3K for each kid. You maintain ideology, but the government sees it as a way of saving money and a very good one at that.

more blah blah blah, you're so full of sh1t.

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 11:48am:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:37am: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:20am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:02am: Because if they withdrew the private funding the majority of private students would revert to public and cost more making crap up again? The UK doesn't fund private schools and their private schools are full. The USA doesn't fund theirs either and they have waiting lists . You cannot argue that it will cost more until you can show the majority will switch. I don't believe they will, people like you and scoot would never send your kids with the commoners. You know the saying, a fool and their money .... and there is no shortage of fools, as you keep proving with just about every post. The vast number of private schools in Australia are low-fee ones ie paying $2000-$3000 per student. The parents are not wealthy. But if you remove government funding and that suddenly becomes $10,000 - $11,000 per student the majority would have no choice but to return to the public system where the government will be out of pocket $3K for each kid. You maintain ideology, but the government sees it as a way of saving money and a very good one at that. Thought the figures would be higher than that Maria. But yeah...the private school system does help out. Just look at the equation in terms of their portion in provision of infrastructure alone.

$2000 - $3000 per student PER TERM would be closer to the truth.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 11:51am:

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:48am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:37am: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:20am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:02am: Because if they withdrew the private funding the majority of private students would revert to public and cost more making crap up again? The UK doesn't fund private schools and their private schools are full. The USA doesn't fund theirs either and they have waiting lists . You cannot argue that it will cost more until you can show the majority will switch. I don't believe they will, people like you and scoot would never send your kids with the commoners. You know the saying, a fool and their money .... and there is no shortage of fools, as you keep proving with just about every post. The vast number of private schools in Australia are low-fee ones ie paying $2000-$3000 per student. The parents are not wealthy. But if you remove government funding and that suddenly becomes $10,000 - $11,000 per student the majority would have no choice but to return to the public system where the government will be out of pocket $3K for each kid. You maintain ideology, but the government sees it as a way of saving money and a very good one at that. Thought the figures would be higher than that Maria. But yeah...the private school system does help out. Just look at the equation in terms of their portion in provision of infrastructure alone. The Catholic and Christian private schools are almost all low-fee. Whenever the subject comes up the media and other commentators focus on the handful of truly elite an very-expensive schools while ignoring the vast number of others. The opposition to private schools is based on envy or ideology, never on outcomes or pragmatism.

In southeast Queensland, 'Churchie' raised $30.9 million itself in fees, charges, parental contributions and other private sources in 2009.

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/where-the-fees-add-up-brisbanes-highest-earning-school-20110304-1bhij.html#ixzz3nwB6oxPO
Follow us: @brisbanetimes on Twitter | brisbanetimes on Facebook

this is ONE christian school .... $30 million in one year PLUS govt. funding? who are you kidding? :D :D :D

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 11:53am:

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:48am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:37am: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:20am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:02am: Because if they withdrew the private funding the majority of private students would revert to public and cost more making crap up again? The UK doesn't fund private schools and their private schools are full. The USA doesn't fund theirs either and they have waiting lists . You cannot argue that it will cost more until you can show the majority will switch. I don't believe they will, people like you and scoot would never send your kids with the commoners. You know the saying, a fool and their money .... and there is no shortage of fools, as you keep proving with just about every post. The vast number of private schools in Australia are low-fee ones ie paying $2000-$3000 per student. The parents are not wealthy. But if you remove government funding and that suddenly becomes $10,000 - $11,000 per student the majority would have no choice but to return to the public system where the government will be out of pocket $3K for each kid. You maintain ideology, but the government sees it as a way of saving money and a very good one at that. Thought the figures would be higher than that Maria. But yeah...the private school system does help out. Just look at the equation in terms of their portion in provision of infrastructure alone. $2000 - $3000 per student PER TERM would be closer to the truth.

Your ignorance continues. Just because you come from an underclass that could not even conceive of private schooling does not mean other people don't aim higher - even on limited incomes. You clearly have not the slightest idea about private schooling.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 11:59am:

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:53am: Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:48am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:37am: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:20am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:02am: Because if they withdrew the private funding the majority of private students would revert to public and cost more making crap up again? The UK doesn't fund private schools and their private schools are full. The USA doesn't fund theirs either and they have waiting lists . You cannot argue that it will cost more until you can show the majority will switch. I don't believe they will, people like you and scoot would never send your kids with the commoners. You know the saying, a fool and their money .... and there is no shortage of fools, as you keep proving with just about every post. The vast number of private schools in Australia are low-fee ones ie paying $2000-$3000 per student. The parents are not wealthy. But if you remove government funding and that suddenly becomes $10,000 - $11,000 per student the majority would have no choice but to return to the public system where the government will be out of pocket $3K for each kid. You maintain ideology, but the government sees it as a way of saving money and a very good one at that. Thought the figures would be higher than that Maria. But yeah...the private school system does help out. Just look at the equation in terms of their portion in provision of infrastructure alone. $2000 - $3000 per student PER TERM would be closer to the truth. Your ignorance continues. Just because you come from an underclass that could not even conceive of private schooling does not mean other people don't aim higher - even on limited incomes. You clearly have not the slightest idea about private schooling.

it should be easy for you to pt up fee's of $2000 Maria .... what's the matter, you afraid to post facts?

and my underclass still has ten times the class you'll ever have  :D :D :D

Private schooling does not offer that much in lasting benefits.

Does that Brisbane school pay tax on its earnings?

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 11:57am:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:51am: Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:48am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:37am: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:20am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:02am: Because if they withdrew the private funding the majority of private students would revert to public and cost more making crap up again? The UK doesn't fund private schools and their private schools are full. The USA doesn't fund theirs either and they have waiting lists . You cannot argue that it will cost more until you can show the majority will switch. I don't believe they will, people like you and scoot would never send your kids with the commoners. You know the saying, a fool and their money .... and there is no shortage of fools, as you keep proving with just about every post. The vast number of private schools in Australia are low-fee ones ie paying $2000-$3000 per student. The parents are not wealthy. But if you remove government funding and that suddenly becomes $10,000 - $11,000 per student the majority would have no choice but to return to the public system where the government will be out of pocket $3K for each kid. You maintain ideology, but the government sees it as a way of saving money and a very good one at that. Thought the figures would be higher than that Maria. But yeah...the private school system does help out. Just look at the equation in terms of their portion in provision of infrastructure alone. The Catholic and Christian private schools are almost all low-fee. Whenever the subject comes up the media and other commentators focus on the handful of truly elite an very-expensive schools while ignoring the vast number of others. The opposition to private schools is based on envy or ideology, never on outcomes or pragmatism. In southeast Queensland, 'Churchie' raised $30.9 million itself in fees, charges, parental contributions and other private sources in 2009. Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/where-the-fees-add-up-brisbanes-highest-earning-school-20110304-1bhij.html#ixzz3nwB6oxPO Follow us: @brisbanetimes on Twitter | brisbanetimes on Facebook this is ONE christian school .... $30 million in one year PLUS govt. funding? who are you kidding? :D :D :D

DO you have anything other than a single example and an unhealthy does of envy?

Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 12:01pm:

Private schooling does not offer that much in lasting benefits. Does that Brisbane school pay tax on its earnings?

How would you know? You never went, you never had kids and your record for accuracy is abysmal. Plus 'benefits' are not the issue.

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 12:00pm:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:59am: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:53am: Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:48am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:37am: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:20am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:02am: Because if they withdrew the private funding the majority of private students would revert to public and cost more making crap up again? The UK doesn't fund private schools and their private schools are full. The USA doesn't fund theirs either and they have waiting lists . You cannot argue that it will cost more until you can show the majority will switch. I don't believe they will, people like you and scoot would never send your kids with the commoners. You know the saying, a fool and their money .... and there is no shortage of fools, as you keep proving with just about every post. The vast number of private schools in Australia are low-fee ones ie paying $2000-$3000 per student. The parents are not wealthy. But if you remove government funding and that suddenly becomes $10,000 - $11,000 per student the majority would have no choice but to return to the public system where the government will be out of pocket $3K for each kid. You maintain ideology, but the government sees it as a way of saving money and a very good one at that. Thought the figures would be higher than that Maria. But yeah...the private school system does help out. Just look at the equation in terms of their portion in provision of infrastructure alone. $2000 - $3000 per student PER TERM would be closer to the truth. Your ignorance continues. Just because you come from an underclass that could not even conceive of private schooling does not mean other people don't aim higher - even on limited incomes. You clearly have not the slightest idea about private schooling. it should be easy for you to pt up fee's of $2000 Maria .... what's the matter, you afraid to post facts? and my underclass still has ten times the class you'll ever have  :D :D :D

Why show you anything? It is literally 'throwing pearls before swine'. You will reject. misinterpret, ignore or run away from any fact you don't like.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 11:51am:

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:48am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:37am: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:20am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:02am: Because if they withdrew the private funding the majority of private students would revert to public and cost more making crap up again? The UK doesn't fund private schools and their private schools are full. The USA doesn't fund theirs either and they have waiting lists . You cannot argue that it will cost more until you can show the majority will switch. I don't believe they will, people like you and scoot would never send your kids with the commoners. You know the saying, a fool and their money .... and there is no shortage of fools, as you keep proving with just about every post. The vast number of private schools in Australia are low-fee ones ie paying $2000-$3000 per student. The parents are not wealthy. But if you remove government funding and that suddenly becomes $10,000 - $11,000 per student the majority would have no choice but to return to the public system where the government will be out of pocket $3K for each kid. You maintain ideology, but the government sees it as a way of saving money and a very good one at that. Thought the figures would be higher than that Maria. But yeah...the private school system does help out. Just look at the equation in terms of their portion in provision of infrastructure alone. The Catholic and Christian private schools are almost all low-fee. Whenever the subject comes up the media and other commentators focus on the handful of truly elite an very-expensive schools while ignoring the vast number of others. The opposition to private schools is based on envy or ideology, never on outcomes or pragmatism.

I know. Just look at this topic for example.

BTW, whilst here....I hope you weren't in any way offended by my posts to you in the Domestic Violence topic. I quite enjoy reading your stuff online. Ok?

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 12:02pm:

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:57am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:51am: Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:48am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:37am: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:20am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:02am: Because if they withdrew the private funding the majority of private students would revert to public and cost more making crap up again? The UK doesn't fund private schools and their private schools are full. The USA doesn't fund theirs either and they have waiting lists . You cannot argue that it will cost more until you can show the majority will switch. I don't believe they will, people like you and scoot would never send your kids with the commoners. You know the saying, a fool and their money .... and there is no shortage of fools, as you keep proving with just about every post. The vast number of private schools in Australia are low-fee ones ie paying $2000-$3000 per student. The parents are not wealthy. But if you remove government funding and that suddenly becomes $10,000 - $11,000 per student the majority would have no choice but to return to the public system where the government will be out of pocket $3K for each kid. You maintain ideology, but the government sees it as a way of saving money and a very good one at that. Thought the figures would be higher than that Maria. But yeah...the private school system does help out. Just look at the equation in terms of their portion in provision of infrastructure alone. The Catholic and Christian private schools are almost all low-fee. Whenever the subject comes up the media and other commentators focus on the handful of truly elite an very-expensive schools while ignoring the vast number of others. The opposition to private schools is based on envy or ideology, never on outcomes or pragmatism. In southeast Queensland, 'Churchie' raised $30.9 million itself in fees, charges, parental contributions and other private sources in 2009. Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/where-the-fees-add-up-brisbanes-highest-earning-school-20110304-1bhij.html#ixzz3nwB6oxPO Follow us: @brisbanetimes on Twitter | brisbanetimes on Facebook this is ONE christian school .... $30 million in one year PLUS govt. funding? who are you kidding? :D :D :D DO you have anything other than a single example and an unhealthy does of envy?

my one example is still 100 times more proof of anything than you've ever put up :D :D :D

why do you spend all your time attacking me instead of supporting your claims? do you really think I give a crap what some botox primed old nutter suffering from illusions of grandeur says about me?  ;D ;D ;D

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 12:04pm:

Why show you anything? It is literally 'throwing pearls before swine'. You will reject. misinterpret, ignore or run away from any fact you don't like.

well that you would never know since you have NEVER, not on any topic I've engaged you with, EVER provided any proof of anything ... for some reason you seem to think flapping your gums is proof enough  :D :D :D

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 12:03pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 12:01pm: Private schooling does not offer that much in lasting benefits. Does that Brisbane school pay tax on its earnings? How would you know? You never went, you never had kids and your record for accuracy is abysmal. Plus 'benefits' are not the issue.

Of course benefits are an issue, else why pay for private schooling?

I asked if that school paid tax, be a fair whack due on $30m! Or is a church school and so exempted from paying tax?

I have proved everything I have posited, very much unlike you. Cheap shot on my childlessness, but it is what everybody expects from you, Longy, abuse but no proof.

Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 12:08pm:

but it is what everybody expects from you, Longy, abuse but no proof.

she used to write reports you know  ;D ;D ;D ;D

.

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 12:11pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 12:08pm: but it is what everybody expects from you, Longy, abuse but no proof. she used to write reports you know  ;D ;D ;D ;D

;D ;D ;D

Another good topic trashed. Thanks Monk.

You too John  >:(

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 1:29pm:

Another good topic trashed. Thanks Monk. You too John  >:(

why is it so hard for any of your retards to post some sort of evidence?

Just did a check.  My Year of graduation from a public high school produced a diplomat, 3 geologists, a pilot, an architect, an internationally acknowledged IT guru, five engineers, a school principal, a surveyor, a pharmacist, two magistrates, a psychiatrist, a general practitioner, two accountants, a criminologist, a paediatrician and two lawyers.

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 12:05pm:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:51am: Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:48am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:37am: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:20am: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 11:02am: Because if they withdrew the private funding the majority of private students would revert to public and cost more making crap up again? The UK doesn't fund private schools and their private schools are full. The USA doesn't fund theirs either and they have waiting lists . You cannot argue that it will cost more until you can show the majority will switch. I don't believe they will, people like you and scoot would never send your kids with the commoners. You know the saying, a fool and their money .... and there is no shortage of fools, as you keep proving with just about every post. The vast number of private schools in Australia are low-fee ones ie paying $2000-$3000 per student. The parents are not wealthy. But if you remove government funding and that suddenly becomes $10,000 - $11,000 per student the majority would have no choice but to return to the public system where the government will be out of pocket $3K for each kid. You maintain ideology, but the government sees it as a way of saving money and a very good one at that. Thought the figures would be higher than that Maria. But yeah...the private school system does help out. Just look at the equation in terms of their portion in provision of infrastructure alone. The Catholic and Christian private schools are almost all low-fee. Whenever the subject comes up the media and other commentators focus on the handful of truly elite an very-expensive schools while ignoring the vast number of others. The opposition to private schools is based on envy or ideology, never on outcomes or pragmatism. I know. Just look at this topic for example. BTW, whilst here....I hope you weren't in any way offended by my posts to you in the Domestic Violence topic. I quite enjoy reading your stuff online. Ok?

Nah not at all!  In fact, I enjoyed it!  I love debating with strong intelligent and articulate people who wont take my word for it and know WHY they believe what they believe. Bring on more of it!

My trigger points are fools and simpletons... Lots to choose from around here!

Aussie wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 1:59pm:

Just did a check.  My Year of graduation from a public high school produced a diplomat, 3 geologists, a pilot, an architect, an internationally acknowledged IT guru, five engineers, a school principal, a surveyor, a pharmacist, two magistrates, a psychiatrist, a general practitioner, two accountants, a criminologist, a paediatrician and two lawyers.

Your point is what? When you graduated there were virtually no private schools other than the extremely elite ones.

Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 12:08pm:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 12:03pm: Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 12:01pm: Private schooling does not offer that much in lasting benefits. Does that Brisbane school pay tax on its earnings? How would you know? You never went, you never had kids and your record for accuracy is abysmal. Plus 'benefits' are not the issue. Of course benefits are an issue, else why pay for private schooling? I asked if that school paid tax, be a fair whack due on $30m! Or is a church school and so exempted from paying tax? I have proved everything I have posited, very much unlike you. Cheap shot on my childlessness, but it is what everybody expects from you, Longy, abuse but no proof.

A) $30M is REVENUE, not profits. Businesses pay tax on PROFITS.
B) The benefits in a private education are many, but you would accept few and not understand the rest.

You seem to struggle with big numbers and forget the 1500 pupils in a school like that. Or perhaps you have such a poverty mindset that you do not relate to large amounts of money.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 3:52pm:

Aussie wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 1:59pm: Just did a check.  My Year of graduation from a public high school produced a diplomat, 3 geologists, a pilot, an architect, an internationally acknowledged IT guru, five engineers, a school principal, a surveyor, a pharmacist, two magistrates, a psychiatrist, a general practitioner, two accountants, a criminologist, a paediatrician and two lawyers. Your point is what? When you graduated there were virtually no private schools other than the extremely elite ones.

My point is that a public school is capable of providing an excellent education, as is indicated in that list of eventual careers.  And you are quite wrong ~ all the well known private schools of today existed then.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 3:52pm:

Aussie wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 1:59pm: Just did a check.  My Year of graduation from a public high school produced a diplomat, 3 geologists, a pilot, an architect, an internationally acknowledged IT guru, five engineers, a school principal, a surveyor, a pharmacist, two magistrates, a psychiatrist, a general practitioner, two accountants, a criminologist, a paediatrician and two lawyers. Your point is what? When you graduated there were virtually no private schools other than the extremely elite ones.

No, so why was I in a private primary school? Took me a few weeks in HS to catch up to kids coming from a public primary school.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 3:52pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 12:08pm: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 12:03pm: Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 12:01pm: Private schooling does not offer that much in lasting benefits. Does that Brisbane school pay tax on its earnings? How would you know? You never went, you never had kids and your record for accuracy is abysmal. Plus 'benefits' are not the issue. Of course benefits are an issue, else why pay for private schooling? I asked if that school paid tax, be a fair whack due on $30m! Or is a church school and so exempted from paying tax? I have proved everything I have posited, very much unlike you. Cheap shot on my childlessness, but it is what everybody expects from you, Longy, abuse but no proof. A) $30M is REVENUE, not profits. Businesses pay tax on PROFITS. B) The benefits in a private education are many, but you would accept few and not understand the rest. You seem to struggle with big numbers and forget the 1500 pupils in a school like that. Or perhaps you have such a poverty mindset that you do not relate to large amounts of money.

Yeah, I ran my own businesses for 25 years, but on $30m revenue there would be a fair whack of profit that should be taxed.

As to private school education, there are few real benefits, for the real prestige schools the old school tie might be of use to some but apart from that it is a lot of dollars for not that much better education than a good public school—and a public school doesn’t coach you, you have to work to pass exams etc.

You like slinging off at me but when it comes to a detailed argument you run away like a little girl.

Aussie wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 4:01pm:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 3:52pm: Aussie wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 1:59pm: Just did a check.  My Year of graduation from a public high school produced a diplomat, 3 geologists, a pilot, an architect, an internationally acknowledged IT guru, five engineers, a school principal, a surveyor, a pharmacist, two magistrates, a psychiatrist, a general practitioner, two accountants, a criminologist, a paediatrician and two lawyers. Your point is what? When you graduated there were virtually no private schools other than the extremely elite ones. My point is that a public school is capable of providing an excellent education, as is indicated in that list of eventual careers.  And you are quite wrong ~ all the well known private schools of today existed then.

Most private schools are relatively recent inventions. What year did you complete high school?

BTW look at a list of MPs, Judges, Magistrates, CEOs etc and see how many had private educations. Would you like to name the internationally acknowledged IT guru as well as the two magistrates? They are public names now. So yes, I am calling you on your claim which while possible, sounds deeply suspicious from just one year.

Quote:

Most private schools are relatively recent inventions. What year did you complete high school?

I'm not saying.  There are way too many real life stalkers who love getting as much info as they can.  Late 60s is as close as I'll say.


Quote:

BTW look at a list of MPs, Judges, Magistrates, CEOs etc and see how many had private educations.

I'm not sure what you are asserting there.  Are you saying the majority had private schooling?



Quote:

Would you like to name the internationally acknowledged IT guru as well as the two magistrates? They are public names now. So yes, I am calling you on your claim which while possible, sounds deeply suspicious from just one year.

If I name them, those same stalkers get a little closer to my real ID.  It was a good year, I'll concede that. 

Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 4:28pm:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 3:52pm: Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 12:08pm: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 12:03pm: Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 12:01pm: Private schooling does not offer that much in lasting benefits. Does that Brisbane school pay tax on its earnings? How would you know? You never went, you never had kids and your record for accuracy is abysmal. Plus 'benefits' are not the issue. Of course benefits are an issue, else why pay for private schooling? I asked if that school paid tax, be a fair whack due on $30m! Or is a church school and so exempted from paying tax? I have proved everything I have posited, very much unlike you. Cheap shot on my childlessness, but it is what everybody expects from you, Longy, abuse but no proof. A) $30M is REVENUE, not profits. Businesses pay tax on PROFITS. B) The benefits in a private education are many, but you would accept few and not understand the rest. You seem to struggle with big numbers and forget the 1500 pupils in a school like that. Or perhaps you have such a poverty mindset that you do not relate to large amounts of money. Yeah, I ran my own businesses for 25 years, but on $30m revenue there would be a fair whack of profit that should be taxed. As to private school education, there are few real benefits, for the real prestige schools the old school tie might be of use to some but apart from that it is a lot of dollars for not that much better education than a good public school—and a public school doesn’t coach you, you have to work to pass exams etc. You like slinging off at me but when it comes to a detailed argument you run away like a little girl.

You ran a lawn-mowing round. Not something to compare to a business with $30M in revenue. You seem utterly incapable of absorbing those size numbers and understanding that a business with $30M revenue might actually spend all $30M. It is a school with massive expenses and building programs.

A third of kids go to private schools. Perhaps the parents know something you don't. In fact, that is axiomatic.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 3:52pm:

Aussie wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 1:59pm: Just did a check.  My Year of graduation from a public high school produced a diplomat, 3 geologists, a pilot, an architect, an internationally acknowledged IT guru, five engineers, a school principal, a surveyor, a pharmacist, two magistrates, a psychiatrist, a general practitioner, two accountants, a criminologist, a paediatrician and two lawyers. Your point is what? When you graduated there were virtually no private schools other than the extremely elite ones.

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

still making crap up I see  :D :D :D :D

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 3:52pm:

A) $30M is REVENUE, not profits. Businesses pay tax on PROFITS.

Why don't you answer the question instead of playing games with semantics, do schools pay taxes on their profits?

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 5:48pm:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 3:52pm: A) $30M is REVENUE, not profits. Businesses pay tax on PROFITS. Why don't you answer the question instead of playing games with semantics, do schools pay taxes on their profits?

I'll answer.  No, they don't given just about all of then are linked to Churches.

Click here for link.

....

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 5:46pm:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 3:52pm: Aussie wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 1:59pm: Just did a check.  My Year of graduation from a public high school produced a diplomat, 3 geologists, a pilot, an architect, an internationally acknowledged IT guru, five engineers, a school principal, a surveyor, a pharmacist, two magistrates, a psychiatrist, a general practitioner, two accountants, a criminologist, a paediatrician and two lawyers. Your point is what? When you graduated there were virtually no private schools other than the extremely elite ones. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D still making crap up I see  :D :D :D :D

Didnt I tell you John.  Its that point in the argument we seem to always get to when longy's back is to the wall, desperate for a reply and what does he do? He wings it with BS facts of course. Its really getting quite tedious.   

Nope, never had a lawnmower round. That was Armpit.

Longy: abuse aplenty, reasoned debate not nearly so much, evidence provided miniscule.

Aussie wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 5:54pm:

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 5:48pm: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 3:52pm: A) $30M is REVENUE, not profits. Businesses pay tax on PROFITS. Why don't you answer the question instead of playing games with semantics, do schools pay taxes on their profits? I'll answer.  No, they don't given just about all of then are linked to Churches. Click here for link.

Oh I know the answer Aussie, I was just highlighting Marias stupidity.

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 5:57pm:

Oh I know the answer Aussie

Yes, Smithy is highly qualified.... ;D

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b76/timbo2530/DIPLOMA.jpg

Swagman wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 6:43pm:

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 5:57pm: Oh I know the answer Aussie Yes, Smithy is highly qualified.... ;D http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b76/timbo2530/DIPLOMA.jpg

Yes Swag, I'm trained to spot the bullshit ... that's why i saw you from miles away

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

Swagman wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 6:43pm: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 5:57pm: Oh I know the answer Aussie Yes, Smithy is highly qualified.... ;D http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b76/timbo2530/DIPLOMA.jpg Yes Swag, I'm trained to spot the bullshit ... that's why i saw you from miles away

Wow that's quality bullshit Smithy....now your just showing off.... :D :D

Swagman wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 7:09pm:

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 7:00pm: Swagman wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 6:43pm: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 5:57pm: Oh I know the answer Aussie Yes, Smithy is highly qualified.... ;D http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b76/timbo2530/DIPLOMA.jpg Yes Swag, I'm trained to spot the bullshit ... that's why i saw you from miles away Wow that's quality bullshit Smithy....now your just showing off.... :D :D

I'm still a beginner compared to you Swag, but I'm trying

Aussie wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 1:59pm:

Just did a check.  My Year of graduation from a public high school produced a diplomat, 3 geologists, a pilot, an architect, an internationally acknowledged IT guru, five engineers, a school principal, a surveyor, a pharmacist, two magistrates, a psychiatrist, a general practitioner, two accountants, a criminologist, a paediatrician and two lawyers.

And a cab driver.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 4:30pm:

Aussie wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 4:01pm: mariacostel wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 3:52pm: Aussie wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 1:59pm: Just did a check.  My Year of graduation from a public high school produced a diplomat, 3 geologists, a pilot, an architect, an internationally acknowledged IT guru, five engineers, a school principal, a surveyor, a pharmacist, two magistrates, a psychiatrist, a general practitioner, two accountants, a criminologist, a paediatrician and two lawyers. Your point is what? When you graduated there were virtually no private schools other than the extremely elite ones. My point is that a public school is capable of providing an excellent education, as is indicated in that list of eventual careers.  And you are quite wrong ~ all the well known private schools of today existed then. Most private schools are relatively recent inventions. What year did you complete high school? BTW look at a list of MPs, Judges, Magistrates, CEOs etc and see how many had private educations. Would you like to name the internationally acknowledged IT guru as well as the two magistrates? They are public names now. So yes, I am calling you on your claim which while possible, sounds deeply suspicious from just one year.

Duh!

He never completed high school....he left at age 16.

Swagman wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 6:43pm:

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 5:57pm: Oh I know the answer Aussie Yes, Smithy is highly qualified.... ;D http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b76/timbo2530/DIPLOMA.jpg

Where the hell do you guys find these pics?

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 8:15pm:

Swagman wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 6:43pm: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 5:57pm: Oh I know the answer Aussie Yes, Smithy is highly qualified.... ;D http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b76/timbo2530/DIPLOMA.jpg Where the hell do you guys find these pics?

http://www.lisajonesconsulting.com/lisa_logo.jpg

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 8:09pm:

Aussie wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 1:59pm: Just did a check.  My Year of graduation from a public high school produced a diplomat, 3 geologists, a pilot, an architect, an internationally acknowledged IT guru, five engineers, a school principal, a surveyor, a pharmacist, two magistrates, a psychiatrist, a general practitioner, two accountants, a criminologist, a paediatrician and two lawyers. And a cab driver.

There was one weird, retarded female.  No-one knows where she ended up.  Some say she went to Sydney where she now lives by herself in some foul bedsit.  She was ~ well, she said she was ~ of Greek Italian descent but most of us reckoned she was straight out of some African jungle.  Hairy bloody thing.  Later, we heard she was claiming to have had a water-side property in Sydney and had twins when she was ten.  We always did know there was something totally unnatural about her.  There were some other really wild stories, but we all knew they had to be false, stuff about being an expert on gardening, HR, middle class domestic violence, real estate, criminology.  There were other rumours but you can't rely on them.  Things like you would not believe.   There's not one of that Class who gives a stuff what she says.  She was fruit loop, and we have heard suggestions she is now far worse.

Anyway, back to the topic.......

ahhh, that's why aussie is so hung up on Lisa

he still hasn't gotten over his high school crush

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 8:28pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 8:15pm: Swagman wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 6:43pm: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 5:57pm: Oh I know the answer Aussie Yes, Smithy is highly qualified.... ;D http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b76/timbo2530/DIPLOMA.jpg Where the hell do you guys find these pics? http://www.lisajonesconsulting.com/lisa_logo.jpg

I don't bloody believe it!

How did you do that?

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 8:35pm:

ahhh, that's why aussie is so hung up on Lisa he still hasn't gotten over his high school crush ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

You wanna hear something really scary?

When Aussie finished high school, I was in kindy.

So that would make him a ......?????

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 8:35pm:

ahhh, that's why aussie is so hung up on Lisa he still hasn't gotten over his high school crush ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Blaaaady hell.  How on Earth did you ever come to think I was referring to Lisa Jones, or anyone like her?    Did you reckon that description fitted her to a 't?'  Wow!

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 8:41pm:

Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 8:35pm: ahhh, that's why aussie is so hung up on Lisa he still hasn't gotten over his high school crush ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D You wanna hear something really scary? When Aussie finished high school, I was in kindy. So that would make him a ......?????

Yep...yet another type of perpetrator  :'(

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8^th, 2015 at 8:50pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 8:41pm: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 8:35pm: ahhh, that's why aussie is so hung up on Lisa he still hasn't gotten over his high school crush ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D You wanna hear something really scary? When Aussie finished high school, I was in kindy. So that would make him a ......????? Yep...yet another type of perpetrator  :'(

No one really believes Aussie's made up class outcomes. Like so much else he says on here. it is a flat-out lie.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 9^th, 2015 at 7:17am:

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 8:50pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 8:41pm: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 8:35pm: ahhh, that's why aussie is so hung up on Lisa he still hasn't gotten over his high school crush ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D You wanna hear something really scary? When Aussie finished high school, I was in kindy. So that would make him a ......????? Yep...yet another type of perpetrator  :'( No one really believes Aussie's made up class outcomes. Like so much else he says on here. it is a flat-out lie.

I find Aussie rather more factual and a lot less abusive than you, Longy.

Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 9^th, 2015 at 7:32am:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 9th, 2015 at 7:17am: Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 8:50pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 8:41pm: Johnsmith wrote on Oct 8th, 2015 at 8:35pm: ahhh, that's why aussie is so hung up on Lisa he still hasn't gotten over his high school crush ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D You wanna hear something really scary? When Aussie finished high school, I was in kindy. So that would make him a ......????? Yep...yet another type of perpetrator  :'( No one really believes Aussie's made up class outcomes. Like so much else he says on here. it is a flat-out lie. I find Aussie rather more factual and a lot less abusive than you, Longy.

It's ironic that you don't realise that your support of Aussie only makes him look worse. And you aren't even bright enough to know why.