Twitter | Search | |
Rob Ford
Politics Prof, Manchester Uni "It is the folly of too many to mistake the echo of a London coffee-house for the voice of the kingdom." (Jonathan Swift)
119,809
Tweets
2,265
Following
30,062
Followers
Tweets
Rob Ford 1h
To be honest banning wouldn’t be my preferred approach I’d rather see them opened up to all regardless of income but I notice you have not engaged with my point about how manifestly unfair they are. Wonder why.
Reply Retweet Like
Rob Ford 1h
A freedom 93% of parents cannot exercise because they don’t earn enough money is not a real freedom. And the “freedom” in question is the freedom of a minority to buy privilege at the expense of everyone else.
Reply Retweet Like
Rob Ford 1h
You haven’t actually offered an argument against the policy though just an(other) assertion that it is bad.
Reply Retweet Like
Rob Ford 1h
Replying to @adbalfour @anandMenon1
See my previous tweet. It’s been fun but I haven’t time for a second lengthy debate just now.
Reply Retweet Like
Rob Ford 1h
It isn’t condescension to call a spade a spade. Find a meaningful argument for your position or don’t bother.
Reply Retweet Like
Rob Ford 1h
Replying to @adbalfour @anandMenon1
No, the Laffer curve doesn’t. Not even Laffer himself thought that. But that’s a diff arg and I have a dinner to cook. Thanks for a stimulating discussion
Reply Retweet Like
Rob Ford 2h
If you think argument by assertion and terrible crap analogies is persuasive then I think it is you who needs an education
Reply Retweet Like
Rob Ford 2h
Replying to @adbalfour @anandMenon1
No we don’t “all know” that. It is an ideological belief on parts of the right for which there is in fact little empirical evidence.
Reply Retweet Like
Rob Ford 2h
Replying to @adbalfour @anandMenon1
They aren’t charities. They don’t deserve charitable status. If parents want to buy a luxury educational good they can pay the same tax they pay on any other luxury good.
Reply Retweet Like
Rob Ford 2h
Replying to @adbalfour @anandMenon1
Isn’t true at all re tax - they contribute more of the total but the *rate* they pay is much lower. The reason is simple - society is much more unequal now so they have more of the taxable income
Reply Retweet Like
Rob Ford 2h
“It’s a slippery slope” can be used mindlessly to defend basically any stupid analogy. As you have neatly demonstrated.
Reply Retweet Like
Rob Ford 2h
Replying to @adbalfour @anandMenon1
Perhaps. If (a) the schools are taxed as they should be (b) funding provided at same £ per student as provided in the state sector. The schools can make up the difference from their own resources.
Reply Retweet Like
Rob Ford 2h
Replying to @adbalfour @anandMenon1
Yes the framing matters.
Reply Retweet Like
Rob Ford 2h
Well done you get the medal for stupidest analogy.
Reply Retweet Like
Rob Ford 2h
Replying to @KeithMansfield
Most private schools offer pathetically few scholarships and many of those go to parents who could anyway afford the fees
Reply Retweet Like
Rob Ford 2h
Replying to @KeithMansfield
I’d be v happy with a reform approach which says eg 40% of intake has to be scholarships to kids who can’t afford the fees. I’m pretty open minded about which path of reform to pursue once we accept the premise that the status quo is unacceptable.
Reply Retweet Like
Rob Ford 2h
Yes I tend to agree on both counts
Reply Retweet Like
Rob Ford 2h
Replying to @KeithMansfield
Private schools select primarily by parental name. The clue is in the name, and the fees.
Reply Retweet Like
Rob Ford 2h
Yes, its a tragedy of the commons situation.
Reply Retweet Like
Rob Ford retweeted
Penfold 2h
Q. Do you think it would be better if there were no private schools? A. Yes, they give people unfair advantages Q. Would you send your kid to a private school if you could afford to? A. Yes, they give people unfair advantages
Reply Retweet Like