kesmom Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 If public schools aren't safe enough to prevent children from being kidnapped, that's a huge problem in and of itself, and the solution isn't to send wealthy kids to safe® places on the off chance that they may be snatched from the school. Tara So high profile families are just supposed to sit around and hope for the safety of the public schools to improve? How much has the overall quality of public schools improved lately? That reminds me of the "civic duty" argument that we shouldn't pull our kids out to hs them because we should all we investing in the public school system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AimeeM Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 So high profile families are just supposed to sit around and hope for the safety of the public schools to improve? How much has the overall quality of public schools improved lately? That reminds me of the "civic duty" argument that we shouldn't pull our kids out to hs them because we should all we investing in the public school system. I was thinking about that article when I wrote my last reply too. Someone here posted the article, I believe... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haiku Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 So high profile families are just supposed to sit around and hope for the safety of the public schools to improve? How much has the overall quality of public schools improved lately? That reminds me of the "civic duty" argument that we shouldn't pull our kids out to hs them because we should all we investing in the public school system. There's no reason high profile families can't use their influence to help ensure that the public schools are safer. And I'm still not buying that only a $40,000 private school education can keep kids safe. I've watched enough Law and Order to know otherwise. :D And if that's what it takes, why aren't we screaming and jumping up and down to assure that all kids get a $40,000 education? Completely aside from the fact that most abductions are not of wealthy kids and are not for ransom money. Most abductions are family or people the child knows. I see the abduction thing as a bit of a straw man/tangent. Tara Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TengoFive Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 It's a matter of percentages. Yes, more abductions happen to "ordinary children", but there are many, many more "ordinary children" than wealthy. If you are a wealthy child, you are more likely to be abducted because a higher percentage of wealthy children are abducted. It's similar to Down's Syndrome. More babies with Down's Syndrome are born to young mothers than to mothers over 35. However, if you're over 35 you're more likely to have a baby with Down's Syndrome. If a family is wealthy, this has to be a priority. To say otherwise is to ignore statistics. Completely aside from the fact that most abductions are not of wealthy kids and are not for ransom money. Most abductions are family or people the child knows. I see the abduction thing as a bit of a straw man/tangent. Tara Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haiku Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 I'm asking sincerely, not to be snarky: What are the statistics? Can you show me the statistics on who is most likely to be abducted and by whom? And are people really walking into schools and snatching children? Tara Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diviya Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Not wanting to wade into the fray, just wanting to make a few points. - most people send their kids to private school primarily in hopes of a better education. Another major reason is not because they don't want to mix with the riff-raff, but because they are hoping for a better environment overall, not just for security reasons. - virtually all private schools are non profit. The single biggest line item in their budget is the salaries and benefits of the teachers. Most of those teachers make far less than they would in a public school. The administrations are usually very small. - for all non-profit private schools, the tuition revenue does not even cover their costs. They all have a gap that they need to make up every single year. Some schools can fill part of that gap with income from their endowment, but most private schools have a small or no endowment. So the rest has to come from those same wealthy families who are already paying the crazy amount of tuition. The schools set their tuition lower on purpose for two reasons - to make their schools more feasible for more people, and because you can get a tax break for a donation to the school, but not for tuition. - most private schools offer a significant portion of their student body financial aid, and many offer the children of teachers discounted or free tuition. And by significant I mean upwards of 50% of the student body receiving some sort of aid. - the costs are so high mainly because they have a low student to teacher ratio, and also because of the financial aid. In the higher cost of living areas, they must pay teachers more just so they can afford to live in the area. - take a look at some of the per pupil expenditures for public schools in high spending districts. (I think DC is one of the highest) We chose to homeschool. We think we can do a better job, at least for now. Not everyone has our options, or our desires. Most people are just trying to give their kids the best opportunities they can, and they will make different decisions on how to do that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarlett Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 What I can't figure out about this thread is why so many are so determined to defend obscene spending. Sure, most of us live in the richest country in the world and sure the poorest among us have more than the richest in some countries. That doesn't change the basic fact that there IS a limit to how much certain things should cost. I don't have a beef against Katie Holmes or any movie star or any rich person. In fact, my best friend since childhood is VERY wealthy now. However, it is not ok that there is such disparity in the world's economic structure. The entire world is wacked out and people here are trying to get Tara to say how much her children's safety is worth. Really? Well, she is probably like the rest of and she would give every dime she has to keep her children safe but that is a red herring in this discussion. And the poor OP....she was just giggling about a $40K education using the same math program that she uses. So no one here thinks $40K a year is outrageous for an elementary education? I don't care if it is NYC and I don't care if it is Katie Holmes....just THINK about how much money 40K is. And yes I realize people have it to spend and I realize people are paying even more than that, but it is still outrageous! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kesmom Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 It is a lot of money, but I would criticize material purchases like jewelry, extravagant homes etc....... long before I would criticize someone for investing in what they believe is the best education for their child. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TengoFive Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Sorry, I don't have time to look them up. I was just answering the logic side of the argument you made, hoping to clarify that part. I'm perfectly willing to change my argument if you have time to find the statistics. As an interesting aside, public school in New York State averages $19,000 per student. Looking at that figure, $40,000 doesn't seem like much really for a private school. Is it in my budget? Certainly not, but its not as insane as it looks at first glance. I'm asking sincerely, not to be snarky: What are the statistics? Can you show me the statistics on who is most likely to be abducted and by whom? And are people really walking into schools and snatching children? Tara Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taz007 Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 So no one here thinks $40K a year is outrageous for an elementary education? I don't care if it is NYC and I don't care if it is Katie Holmes....just THINK about how much money 40K is. And yes I realize people have it to spend and I realize people are paying even more than that, but it is still outrageous! Outrageous according to whom? I don't think $40,000 is outrageous in the least and I would/will pay that amount in a heartbeat if the school were to offer what I wanted for my child. Different strokes .... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fraidycat Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 EVERYTHING is outrageous in NYC, if you think about it. Teeny-tiny, studio apartments for twice as much as most of us pay for a house. $40,000 in NYC does not sound outrageous. Part of that has to pay the teachers who have to pay to live in NYC to work. I tell my kids everyday "Life is NOT fair. Get over it." It can't be. "Fair", that is. It will never happen. The wealthy employ the not so wealthy. LIFE itself is "survival of the fittest." That's the way it has always been, that's the way it always will be. Whether that be in health, or wealth. It may not be fair, but it's life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sewingmama Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 I do not consider $40,000 a lavish tuition for someone with that level of fame. :iagree: When I saw the cost I thought it was low and that Katie had hit skid row with her divorce - for Suri I thought they would choose a school for $400,000. From what the media says - Suri's clothing in her wardrobe costs more then her school tuition. Personally I think they are skimping on her :lol: If I had their money I would be throwing a lot more at my child's education then that. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stripe Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 I'm asking sincerely, not to be snarky: What are the statistics? Can you show me the statistics on who is most likely to be abducted and by whom? And are people really walking into schools and snatching children? There appears to have been an abduction / rape of a boy from his elementary school in Detroit yesterday. I certainly hope this is unusual. Clearly the only cost of an education is not the cost of the book. The expertise of the teachers, the equipment, the facilities, and the like also contribute to the school environment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarlett Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 EVERYTHING is outrageous in NYC, if you think about it. Teeny-tiny, studio apartments for twice as much as most of us pay for a house. $40,000 in NYC does not sound outrageous. Part of that has to pay the teachers who have to pay to live in NYC to work. I tell my kids everyday "Life is NOT fair. Get over it." It can't be. "Fair", that is. It will never happen. The wealthy employ the not so wealthy. LIFE itself is "survival of the fittest." That's the way it has always been, that's the way it always will be. Whether that be in health, or wealth. It may not be fair, but it's life. Yes. THIS is basically my point. Except I appear to be bothered by it and many of you are 'meh that is the way it is.' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AimeeM Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Yes. THIS is basically my point. Except I appear to be bothered by it and many of you are 'meh that is the way it is.' I guess I don't understand. Do you want life to be completely "fair"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarlett Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 I guess I don't understand. Do you want life to be completely "fair"? LOL. Why yes. Is that such an 'out there' concept? Does 'fair' not appeal to you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mytwomonkeys Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 i think it sounds reasonable for multi millionaires. my sister pays 10,000 for a private school in atlanta and their income is way less than tom and katie's. not to mention, people in hollywood take vacations that cost 5,000 night and more. crazy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarlett Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 i think it sounds reasonable. my sister pays 10,000 for a private school in atlanta and their income is way less than tom and katie's. not to mention, people in hollywood take vacations that cost 5,000 night and more. crazy! So you are saying it is 'reasonable' for the 'crazy'? :D I don't think anyone understands me. Sigh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AimeeM Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 So you are saying it is 'reasonable' for the 'crazy'? :D I don't think anyone understands me. Sigh. Or we just haven't had our coffee yet :D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mytwomonkeys Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 So you are saying it is 'reasonable' for the 'crazy'? :D I don't think anyone understands me. Sigh. i didn't read your posts yet, lol. i'm sorry. i don't know if i understand what your point is, but i will go back and read the whole thread. i jumped the gun and just replied to the OP's first question. reasonable for me? no. but then again jeans that cost $100 plus sounds insane to me, lol. i just think $40,000 for an annual tuition of a child belonging to someone with that kind of cash and fame sounds reasonable when compared to others in their social circle and equivalent status. that's all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarlett Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 i didn't read your posts yet, lol. i'm sorry. i don't know if i understand what your point is, but i will go back and read the whole thread. i jumped the gun and just replied to the OP's first question. reasonable for me? no. but then again jeans that cost $100 plus sounds insane to me, lol. i just think $40,000 for an annual tuition of a child belonging to someone with that kind of cash and fame sounds reasonable when compared to others in their social circle and equivalent status. that's all. Yes, I agree with that. My point (lost in this thread I think) is that the fact there are such vastly different social circles seems crazy to me. My point has nothing to do with Katie specifcally...from the little I know of her from the news I always felt sorry for her ever since she got sucked into Tom Cruises weird world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mytwomonkeys Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Yes, I agree with that. My point (lost in this thread I think) is that the fact there are such vastly different social circles seems crazy to me. My point has nothing to do with Katie specifcally...from the little I know of her from the news I always felt sorry for her ever since she got sucked into Tom Cruises weird world. i understand. :grouphug: people with that much money might as well live on a different planet from me. i really do not understand their lifestyles at all; it is truly foreign to me. my own sister cannot wrap her brain around why i would need to budget for a haircut, lol. it.blew.her.mind when i told her that. she is very generous with what she has though for the most part. of course, she spends lavishly and foolishly in my eyes at times, but really, it is not my place to judge her or anyone else. i could do more myself. give more. be more. we all have room for improvement. regardless of what i have, i can still make a bigger impact than i do. i need to own that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarlett Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 i understand. :grouphug: people with that much money might as well live on a different planet from me. i really do not understand their lifestyles at all; it is truly foreign to me. my own sister cannot wrap her brain around why i would need to budget for a haircut, lol. it.blew.her.mind when i told her that. she is very generous with what she has though for the most part. of course, she spends lavishly and foolishly in my eyes at times, but really, it is not my place to judge her or anyone else. i could do more myself. give more. be more. we all have room for improvement. regardless of what i have, i can still make a bigger impact than i do. i need to own that. It is NOT judging to acknowledge someone is spending lavishly and foolishly. And I don't mean 'lavishly and foolishly' for THEIR circumstances or income. I mean lavishly and foolishly period. As in it is INSANE that some people can't read and other's spend 40K or more per year for their 6 year old's education. That is not a judgment on a particular person for the way they spend their money, but a judgment against a society that is set up that way. I don't like it. So there.:D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mytwomonkeys Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 It is NOT judging to acknowledge someone is spending lavishly and foolishly. And I don't mean 'lavishly and foolishly' for THEIR circumstances or income. I mean lavishly and foolishly period. As in it is INSANE that some people can't read and other's spend 40K or more per year for their 6 year old's education. That is not a judgment on a particular person for the way they spend their money, but a judgment against a society that is set up that way. I don't like it. So there.:D i'm not really sure how you feel?? lol. i understand. i really do see your point of view and i don't necessarily disagree at all. society is not fair but only society is to blame. good discussion!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jen500 Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 It is NOT judging to acknowledge someone is spending lavishly and foolishly. And I don't mean 'lavishly and foolishly' for THEIR circumstances or income. I mean lavishly and foolishly period. As in it is INSANE that some people can't read and other's spend 40K or more per year for their 6 year old's education. That is not a judgment on a particular person for the way they spend their money, but a judgment against a society that is set up that way. I don't like it. So there.:D I'm sure you've noticed that sometimes life just isn't fair. There are many things that not all the money in the world can make 'fair'. Physical and mental illnesses, natural disasters, cheating spouses, learning disabilities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarlett Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 I'm sure you've noticed that sometimes life just isn't fair. There are many things that not all the money in the world can make 'fair'. Physical and mental illnesses, natural disasters, cheating spouses, learning disabilities. Yes. I've noticed. And I don't like it one bit. :tongue_smilie: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jen500 Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Yes. I've noticed. And I don't like it one bit. :tongue_smilie: Sigh, I don't like it either...I don't think anyone is immune. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrganicMom Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 forty-grand is beginning to look like nothing. and truly it is. a million dollars is not what it used to be. and really is nothing compared to the worlds riches and the worlds poverty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fraidycat Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 (edited) I don't think anyone understands me. Sigh. It's not that I don't understand you. I understand perfectly well what you are saying. I am just saying that I don't agree with you. :D I don't think it is possible, nor even desirable for everything to be "fair". Now, having said that, I DO wish that those in the lowest of low position in ilfe had it better. I wish everyone had Love, Enough Food, Clean Water, and Shelter. I'm just not Robin Hood about it. I don't think taking from the "haves" for the "have nots" in a give-away type of situation is the answer. Isn't that Communism? To use the example of the $40,000 tuition - How many jobs would people be out of if that school didn't exist? Teachers, administration, janitors, etc. Those people have families to support, too. What about Katie, herself - If she didn't have her money? How many assistants, home staff, drivers, security etc. would also be out of a job? Now multiply that by all the "rich people" and our economy would be way worse than it is now. All those lavish vacations? Hotel staff, kitchen staff, support staff...jobs, all gone. It just doesn't make sense to me to wish that the "haves" didn't have to spend "outrageous" (each person's definition is different) amounts. *I* don't have that kind of money to spend, not even close, but I don't begrudge those who do. Edited September 13, 2012 by fraidycat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazyforlatin Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 I see no problem with how people spend their money on education. In my next life, I'm applying for a position at that school. :D. I read in NYTimes that there is a start-up school that pays its teachers 6-figures, but they search for the top candidates. PhDs are welcome. If you look at the CVs of some of the teachers at the elite schools, they do have PhDs or JDs, for those teaching civics or Constitutional law. I don't see how we can pull people out of their 6-figure jobs or attract the best minds to teach if we don't pay them an adequate salary. Someone has to pay for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mandy in TN Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 It's not that I don't understand you. I understand perfectly well what you are saying. I am just saying that I don't agree with you. :D I don't think it is possible, or even desirable for everything to be "fair". Now, having said that, I DO wish that those in the lowest of low position in ilfe had it better. I wish everyone had Love, Enough Food, Clean Water, and Shelter. I'm just not Robin Hood about it. I don't think taking from the "haves" for the "have nots" in a give-away type of situation is the answer. Isn't that Communism? To use the example of the $40,000 tuition - How many jobs would people be out of if that school didn't exist? Teachers, administration, janitors, etc. Those people have families to support, too. What about Katie, herself - If she didn't have her money? How many assistants, home staff, drivers, security etc. would also be out of a job? Now multiply that by all the "rich people" and our economy would be way worse than it is now. All those lavish vacations? Hotel staff, kitchen staff, support staff...jobs, all gone. It just doesn't make sense to me to wish that the "haves" didn't have to spend "outrageous" (each person's definition is different) amounts. *I* don't have that kind of money to spend, not even close, but I don't begrudge those who do. :iagree:Frankly, this everyone-should-have-the same-thing line of thinking is what is unfair. If everyone is given the same thing regardless of what they do for a living, regardless of how many hours they work, regardless of education or innate ability, even regardless of money earned by their parents or grandparents or luck, then why try to achieve anything? After all, you are just going to get the same thing as everyone else! :banghead: Is this what we are talking about as fair- everyone should have the same things? If so, it is just sad and wrong. Mandy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
momma2three Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 So you are saying it is 'reasonable' for the 'crazy'? :D I don't think anyone understands me. Sigh. I understand you. We're living in a new Gilded Age, where there is greater wealth disparity than ever before in US history. And that disparity is continuing to grow, leaving many thousands of millions of people behind in the dust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucy the Valiant Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 $40K also equals 1 year at Harvard. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarlett Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 It's not that I don't understand you. I understand perfectly well what you are saying. I am just saying that I don't agree with you. :D I don't think it is possible, nor even desirable for everything to be "fair". Well, you are correct we do not agree. What you have bolded made my stomach lurch. It just doesn't make sense to me to wish that the "haves" didn't have to spend "outrageous" (each person's definition is different) amounts. *I* don't have that kind of money to spend, not even close, but I don't begrudge those who do. As I said before I understand that many factors (desire to work, ability, addictions, mental illness, greed, human nature, wars, politics etc) make this a complex issue. However, I do take issue with your idea that if things were more 'fair' then no one would have any reason to work. That would indicate that work ethic is tied to need. That is not true. I've seen hard workers living in poverty and I've seen rich people (from inheritance) who won't lift a finger to help themselves or others in any way. And I've seen the reverse and all things in between. I don't care anything about capitalism or communism or socialism or any other sort of political 'solution'. I also don't care if Katie spends 40K or 4 billion on her child. I just wish the rest of the world all went to sleep with full bellies and had access to clean water and didn't live in fear of war and violence. And if you want to bring it closer to home...I know plenty of people who honestly do not have all they need for decent lives. So yeah, when I hear that someone has 40 THOUSAND dollars a year to spend on a elementary education I feel ill. Not angry at them...not wishing them to be poor and not wishing they would give me their money. I just feel ill. Surely I am not the only person who reacts this way to the disparity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thefragile7393 Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Going back to a way earlier post.....I would love to be able to send my kids to the Obamas' school, Sidwell Friends. That looks like a really really cool place. I love homeschool and being with them but I love the look of that place too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mandy in TN Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Well, you are correct we do not agree. What you have bolded made my stomach lurch. As I said before I understand that many factors (desire to work, ability, addictions, mental illness, greed, human nature, wars, politics etc) make this a complex issue. However, I do take issue with your idea that if things were more 'fair' then no one would have any reason to work. That would indicate that work ethic is tied to need. That is not true. I've seen hard workers living in poverty and I've seen rich people (from inheritance) who won't lift a finger to help themselves or others in any way. And I've seen the reverse and all things in between. I don't care anything about capitalism or communism or socialism or any other sort of political 'solution'. I also don't care if Katie spends 40K or 4 billion on her child. I just wish the rest of the world all went to sleep with full bellies and had access to clean water and didn't live in fear of war and violence. And if you want to bring it closer to home...I know plenty of people who honestly do not have all they need for decent lives. So yeah, when I hear that someone has 40 THOUSAND dollars a year to spend on a elementary education I feel ill. Not angry at them...not wishing them to be poor and not wishing they would give me their money. I just feel ill. Surely I am not the only person who reacts this way to the disparity. Perhaps you could argue that work ethic is not tied to need, but most people don't want to work so that somebody else can sit it out and do nothing. (I would argue just as strongly that work does have at least something to do with desire to have something more.) As you pointed out, when people are given handouts, sometimes they feel no need to participate. More and more will feel that way if the handout they get is the same regardless of effort. Mandy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fraidycat Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 (edited) Well, you are correct we do not agree. What you have bolded made my stomach lurch. As I said before I understand that many factors (desire to work, ability, addictions, mental illness, greed, human nature, wars, politics etc) make this a complex issue. However, I do take issue with your idea that if things were more 'fair' then no one would have any reason to work. That would indicate that work ethic is tied to need. That is not true. I've seen hard workers living in poverty and I've seen rich people (from inheritance) who won't lift a finger to help themselves or others in any way. And I've seen the reverse and all things in between. I don't care anything about capitalism or communism or socialism or any other sort of political 'solution'. I also don't care if Katie spends 40K or 4 billion on her child. I just wish the rest of the world all went to sleep with full bellies and had access to clean water and didn't live in fear of war and violence. And if you want to bring it closer to home...I know plenty of people who honestly do not have all they need for decent lives. So yeah, when I hear that someone has 40 THOUSAND dollars a year to spend on a elementary education I feel ill. Not angry at them...not wishing them to be poor and not wishing they would give me their money. I just feel ill. Surely I am not the only person who reacts this way to the disparity. The first bolded part you attributed to me, but that was not my argument, it was the poster agreeing with me and adding their bit. I said nothing about work ethic. But, I will say that even those who "don't lift a finger" are still probably spending their money somewhere - which, in turn, is paying wages and allowing those people to spend money at the grocery store, hire the plumber to fix the toilet, etc. The second, I agree with you. I even stated as much in my post. I'm not saying things are perfect right now. What I am saying is that I don't think they'd be perfect the other way either. "Fairness" or wealth distribution is not the answer, IMO. ETA: After re-reading I think I see where the miscommunication is. I am saying that the people UP the money chain CREATE the jobs. If they didn't have the money to spend, it would not trickle down. I didn't say people wouldn't want to work, I'm saying that there would NOT BE JOBS to be had. Edited September 13, 2012 by fraidycat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarlett Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Perhaps you could argue that work ethic is not tied to need, but most people don't want to work so that somebody else can sit it out and do nothing. (I would argue just as strongly that work does have at least something to do with desire to have something more.) As you pointed out, when people are given handouts, sometimes they feel no need to participate. More and more will feel that way if the handout they get is the same regardless of effort. Mandy I am not following you....saying work ethic is not (always) tied to need is different than saying we don't want to work so that somebody else can sit and do nothing. I am not saying that. That wouldn't be fair now would it. ;) I am not advocating handouts. However, I disagree with you that people will 'more and more' feel no need to work if they are helped in some way. I just do not believe it is that simple. We all love success stories, but for every one of those (hard work= improved lot in life) there are 100 who toil their lives away and never have their basic needs met. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarlett Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 The first bolded part you attributed to me, but that was not my argument, it was the poster agreeing with me and adding their bit. Yes, I see that now. Sorry about that. I said nothing about work ethic. But, I will say that even those who "don't lift a finger" are still probably spending their money somewhere - which, in turn, is paying wages and allowing those people to spend money at the grocery store, hire the plumber to fix the toilet, etc. The second, I agree with you. I even stated as much in my post. I'm not saying things are perfect right now. What I am saying is that I don't think they'd be perfect the other way either. "Fairness" or wealth distribution is not the answer, IMO. ETA: After re-reading I think I see where the miscommunication is. I am saying that the people UP the money chain CREATE the jobs. If they didn't have the money to spend, it would not trickle down. I didn't say people wouldn't want to work, I'm saying that there would NOT BE JOBS to be had. I agree....about the creation of jobs. That is all fine. Doesn't make me feel better about those who don't have enough to survive on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fraidycat Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Scarlett, I think we agree on the main concept, but something is getting lost in translation. I wish poor had more. That the disparity wasn't as great. World peace, enough to eat for everyone, etc. But, I don't wish that the wealthy didn't have. KWIM? I think there still needs to be disparity, but the gap would be smaller in my perfect world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarlett Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Scarlett, I think we agree on the main concept, but something is getting lost in translation. I wish poor had more. That the disparity wasn't as great. World peace, enough to eat for everyone, etc. But, I don't wish that the wealthy didn't have. KWIM? I think there still needs to be disparity, but the gap would be smaller in my perfect world. Yes I agree we are agreeing on the main concept. Going off now to think about why there needs to be disparity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fraidycat Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Going off now to think about why there needs to be disparity. To create the jobs. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenjenn Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 So no one here thinks $40K a year is outrageous for an elementary education? I don't care if it is NYC and I don't care if it is Katie Holmes....just THINK about how much money 40K is. And yes I realize people have it to spend and I realize people are paying even more than that, but it is still outrageous! Frankly, I find the average cost of a college education these days far more outrageous than $40k a year for a private elementary school serving high profile celebrity children. New York state spends over $18k per pupil, public school. Is it so outrageous for a high profile famous rich celebrity to pick a school that invests twice as much for a private education? Everything is relative. I'm sure some of the most frugal people on this board are still considered outrageous decadent westerners by some impoverished person in a remote corner of the world. They could feed their family for what many of us spend on a modest birthday party. Everything is relative and has context. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
................... Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Frankly, I find the average cost of a college education these days far more outrageous than $40k a year for a private elementary school serving high profile celebrity children. New York state spends over $18k per pupil, public school. Is it so outrageous for a high profile famous rich celebrity to pick a school that invests twice as much for a private education? Everything is relative. I'm sure some of the most frugal people on this board are still considered outrageous decadent westerners by some impoverished person in a remote corner of the world. They could feed their family for what many of us spend on a modest birthday party. Everything is relative and has context. Well said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadianmumof5 Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Sorry, haven't read through the whole thread but wanted to say that I love seeing what these private schools are using!!! When family/friends or even strangers start asking questions about how I (clearly not a properly qualified teacher) make curricula decisions, I just say that I am using the same curriculum that a couple of very expensive, very exclusive private schools use. And we don't have to spend $25,000 per year, per kid to get it!!! That pretty much stops the whole conversation :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingersmom Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 The school Suri Cruise is attending is a brand spankin new private school. It was rumored that she was going to go to a Catholic School in New York initially (that Lady Gaga attended :001_smile:) but I guess her Scientologist father put the end to that. I have lived in/around NYC my entire life so I don't even blink at the cost of private schools in NYC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beth in SW WA Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 *I* don't have that kind of money to spend, not even close, but I don't begrudge those who do. :iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.