Sikh School To Be Built In Slough, England.

[vidcc]

Oh so the US doesn't and the UK does? Idiotic blanket statement.

the uk government will fund a lot of things the us doesn't. Many things we have charities for here are funded by government grants in the UK

It sounds like Britain will fund teaching of religion to save government money.....a whole 10%.

No they do not fund the teaching of religion, they pay for the national curriculum...btw. the school has to have teachers qualified and licensed to teach that curriculum.... you keep raising 10% but that was just the amount the community had to raise as condition of the grant...no small amount for a community to raise...it has nothing to do with the funding of the school once open

Maybe the state can pay 90% of my mortgage.

don't be silly

[UKResident]

Busyman, the UK government paid 90% of the building cost as a grant, they do not pay 90% of the running costs of the school - period. Therefore they are not saving 10% but a whole lot more. If these children were to go to a state school the government would bear the cost of their whole education, for the six years these kids will be at that school. At the Sikh school they will pay a percentage of the money they pay per pupil to state schools. This changes with age, over the six years the government will pay, as a grant, an average of 50% of the amount they would pay to an equivalent pupil at a state school. This means that the longer the school is open, the more the government saves, after a few years the government would have been paid back their original 'grant' and would be making a profit.

As to your other assertion that there is no segregation in schools in the US, l suggest you read more.

Segregated Shools Return

Learning Point

The Civil Rights Project

At the beginning of the twenty-first century, American public schools are now twelve years into the process of continuous resegregation. The desegregation of black students, which increased continuously from the l950s to the late l980s, has now receded to levels not seen in three decades. Although the South remains the nation's most integrated region for both blacks and whites, it is the region that is most rapidly going backwards as the courts terminate many major and successful desegregation orders

[Busyman]

Busyman, the UK government paid 90% of the building cost as a grant, they do not pay 90% of the running costs of the school - period. Therefore they are not saving 10% but a whole lot more. If these children were to go to a state school the government would bear the cost of their whole education, for the six years these kids will be at that school. At the Sikh school they will pay a percentage of the money they pay per pupil to state schools. This changes with age, over the six years the government will pay, as a grant, an average of 50% of the amount they would pay to an equivalent pupil at a state school. This means that the longer the school is open, the more the government saves, after a few years the government would have been paid back their original 'grant' and would be making a profit.

Dude, I know about the building cost. The point is you can call it a grant or whateverthefuck. The school will have Sikh ideology and the state paid for it. Now are you saying the state pays 50% of the ongoing education too?

As to your other assertion that there are no segregation in schools in the US, l suggest you read more.

Segregated ShoolsRreturn

Learning Point

The Civil Rights Project

Great googling. Maybe you should read up on the landscape of the 60's and the present. Segregation then and now are entirely different.

Segregation and integration are not always opposites.

You shouldn't google in lieu of common sense.

[Busyman]

the uk government will fund a lot of things the us doesn't. Many things we have charities for here are funded by government grants in the UK




No they do not fund the teaching of religion, they pay for the national curriculum...btw. the school has to have teachers qualified and licensed to teach that curriculum.... you keep raising 10% but that was just the amount the community had to raise as condition of the grant...no small amount for a community to raise...it has nothing to do with the funding of the school once open

Do any of those teacher's teach Sikh ideology? Yes or No?
Plus UKResident said once open it's 50% funded. Is that correct?

[UKResident]

The author of the initial post made no comment that a new school was needed.

Hobbes, you talk of the original poster as though he were an educated person putting up a reasonable argument. Have a look at his next post --

So how would you feel if you were involved in a car accident with a Sikh motorcyclist? ... and his (or her) head got splattered all over your windscreen because thier tuban didn't quiet offer the level of protection that a crash helmet does?

I know that is a comment thats always brought up in the race debate but it's so very true.

I am sure is you went to thier country and made yourself a nice bit lump of roast pork they might get the hump... (but I could be completely wrong there as I am not sure if they eat pork or not!!)

If the area didn't qualify for a new school according to government criteria, a grant would not have been made. As l stated in an earlier post, l live in the area and it is expanding at a very fast rate, if they built a new school every year for ten years it would still not significantly decrease classroom sizes.

It's not so much Sikh's that I have a problem with, its people not acting as we (English) act... I don't give a monkeys which religion people wish to follow, thats thier right as a human being... but wearing a veil in public??? There is no need for that in this day and age...

[Busyman]

Hobbes, you talk of the original poster as though he were an educated person putting up a reasonable argument. Have a look at his next post --



If the area didn't qualify for a new school according to government criteria, a grant would not have been made. As l stated in an earlier post, l live in the area and it is expanding at a very fast rate, if they built a new school every year for ten years it would still not significantly decrease classroom sizes.

So basically the UK government awards grants to qualified applicants to decrease classroom sizes regardless of extra curriculum.

What's weird is that they are funding 90% and selling out for 10.

[3RA1N1AC]

Originally Posted by robedwards99
It's not so much Sikh's that I have a problem with, its people not acting as we (English) act... I don't give a monkeys which religion people wish to follow, thats thier right as a human being... but wearing a veil in public??? There is no need for that in this day and age...

this kind of statement begs some questions: how does on decide how much conformity is too little, and how much is too much? spin a wheel with percentages listed on it? does he suppose anyone has any right to dress/act/speak differently from what he reckons to be normal, AT ALL? who gets to decide what counts as "acting english"? how would he feel if it were determined that something about his own behavior does not fit the social norm, isn't quite mainstream english enough, and people want him to change?

[UKResident]

So basically the UK government awards grants to qualified applicants to decrease classroom sizes regardless of extra curriculum.

What's weird is that they are funding 90% and selling out for 10.

Why do you persist with this 90% \ 10% argument? l've already explained to you how spurious this is.

Class sizes are a determinate of need, is that too hard to understand?

3RAINIAC, l hope you realise they were not my words, they are a quote from the person whose original post was quoted at the start of this thread. My contention is that he posed the original question from a racist point of view and not from a concern for his 'taxes'.

[3RA1N1AC]

3RAINIAC, l hope you realise they were not my words

of course. i had to manually copy & paste that rob99 quote 'cause hitting the "quote" link only included your words. so yes. i realized i was commenting on someone who apparently is not in the filesharingtalk forum.

i'll go back and take your name off it, to clarify.

[Busyman]

Why do you persist with this 90% \ 10% argument? l've already explained to you how spurious this is.

Class sizes are a determinate of need, is that too hard to understand?

What the hell are you on about? I posted 2 whole sentences...what you skipped the first?

So basically the UK government awards grants to qualified applicants to decrease classroom sizes regardless of extra curriculum.

And how is the 90/10 split spurious?

What's weird is that they are funding 90% and selling out for 10.

It can't be spurious if it's true.
Was it said that the school will teach Sikh school ideology? Yes
Was it said that the school building will be 90% funded by the government? Yes
Someone further said that it's 50% funded by the government for ongoing education.
If you are going to use words like spurious, know what they mean.