<p>He calls Harvard affluent and pretentious. Does that make him shallow and sad? Or the smartest kid on the eastern seaboard.</p>
<p>I hope you’ve raised your kids to be self confident also, but, on planet earth we all have moments of doubt ( unless your head is so far up you know what). That’s why I’masking these questions about how hard it is to be around wealth for thoughtful, decent children.</p>
<p>omedog: who are you expecting answers from? </p>
<p>Look, I’m a sample size of one. I can’t speak for others. I’ve definitely been in situations where I’ve felt, uh-oh, I’m out of place here, but only in specific contexts - formal dinners for a small, selective group of people, etc. Have I met rich kids who have no conception of what life is like for anyone not in the upper class? Sure. I hope I qualify as a thoughtful and decent person. But you know what, most of the time, it simply doesn’t bother me - it’s simply not part of the discussion. If I’m working with other students on a project, I care about the work they’re doing and the perspective they offer, not about what car their parents drive. I’m struggling to think of a case that comes up in the normal course of college where socioeconomic background has come to the fore. Again, I’m a sample size of one, but on 99.9% of the days, I don’t notice whether I’m “around wealth” or not. The 0.1% - which if you’re doing your math is about one day out of my undergrad career - had something to do with politics and the elections.</p>
<p>I’m fortunate that even though my family’s entire annual income couldn’t pay for tuition at my school, I have enough scholarship money that I’m not hard up at all. So maybe I’m not the person you want to hear from.</p>
<p>I’m trying to figure out your logic here, and I can’t. What are you asserting?</p>
<p>*
My teacher went to Harvard, worked at NASA, made a lot of money, so retired to teaching *
My youngest has a prof at her instate directional, who was an astronaut. They call him “Pinky”.
My oldest and a large part of her prep school graduating class, also graduates of prestigious undergrad programs like Carleton and Williams have gone into education.
She went as far as getting a grad degree in teaching as well.</p>
<p>omedog wrote: “He calls Harvard affluent and pretentious. Does that make him shallow and sad?”</p>
<p>“That’s why I’m asking these questions about how hard it is to be around wealth for thoughtful, decent children.”</p>
<p>Each person is entitled to his opinion. My alma mater was almost on par in affluence with Harvard. While 65% of us were on FinAid, 35% weren’t – meaning mom or pops could write a check for the full year’s fees w/o blinking an eye. Was there pretentiousnes? Sure. But I can slough it off w/o any problem.</p>
<p>But other peoples’ peculiarities (or downright noisome attitudes) never created any gulfs in my mind. At my alma mater, conspicuous displays of wealth were frowned upon. I couldn’t tell you the wealth of the vast majority of my classmates. Period.</p>
<p>There’s pretentiousness and jockeying for status in your kids’ schools this very moment – regardless of wealth. Be it athleticism, “popularity” or just extroverts. I would imagine if Mom & Dad don’t make a big deal about others wealth or lack of it, the kids will fall in line.</p>
<p>My kids are beneficiaries of great wealth but also have seen mom and dad serve and work among the poorest of the poor – all the while being grateful for our needs being met. They’ve seen us both in formal wear and on another day in sandals walking in slums. I’m pretty sure they’ll be alright.</p>
<p>And to be clear: wealthy people can be very thoughtful and decent as well – I’m not sure if you’re making that distinction.</p>
<p>"I guess I do think that rich kids are bringing Porsches and private planes to school. I also think that that keeps poorer kids from socializing as much(not strictly a negative if it means less drinking and drug use). I think feeling poor makes a person feel like a loser, "</p>
<p>1) you’re naive if you don’t also think there are rich kids (of the private plane level) at plenty of state schools. The rich at that level don’t have to prove anything to anybody. Plenty of big time money at Ole Miss or UTexas, as examples. </p>
<p>2) my S has a fraternity brother whose mother is a major network news anchor. Also on his campus is the son of one of Hollywood’s biggest movie actors. He should be intimidated by their wealth … Why, again?</p>
<p>Sure, it can be tough being the only poor one among your friends at a school like HYPS. Some people really won’t comprehend what you mean when you say you can’t go somewhere expensive with them because you don’t have the money. They’ll think you just didn’t have time to go to the bank and will often to lend you some cash. But often, those friends will be really generous and let you raid their closets, borrow their Porsches or invite you to visit their fantastic vacation homes. Your own parents may not be able to afford to come visit you on campus for parents weekends or to watch you play soccer, but someone else’s rich dad might invite you out for dinner. It will work out and you’ll get an superb education.</p>
<p>My children are thoughtful and decent. They also have parents who are wealthy. Do you honestly believe that there are no thoughtful, decent children who have wealthy parents?</p>
<p>BTW-you would never know my kids have wealthy parents.</p>
omedog, could we please have definitions of the words “decent” and “thoughtful” as you use them in post #21? The implications are disturbing, but I may not have grasped your meaning.</p>
<p>While keeping salaries down is a part, there’s also some truth to it from what I’ve seen/heard as a public school student, undergrad with SOME classmates who ended up at some tippy-top Ed grad schools*, and friends…many of whom were Ivy/elite alums who are/were teachers. </p>
<p>However, it is with a minority which makes up a critical enough mass combined with the pay along with level of denigration students/parents/American pop culture at large perpetuate against those in the profession, bureaucratic micro & mismanagement from admins/schoolboards/DOE, and horrendous working conditions in the poorer schools…especially in rural and inner-city areas which tends to discourage many of the best & brightest students from even considering teaching or to drop out of it after less than 5 years due to burnout from all that BS. </p>
<p>In short…a bit of a chicken or egg problem. </p>
<ul>
<li>I knew of a few folks including one non-URM & non-ORM and upper SES college hall mate and a former post-college roommate who were admitted to a Top 3 MEd programs with below 3.0 cumulative GPA and abysmal GRE scores. They would all fit the stereotype of a teacher candidate who graduated in the bottom half of their respective college graduating classes.<br></li>
</ul>
<p>On the flipside, there were plenty of undergrad classmates who graduated near the top who pursued the same profession because they were extremely idealistic and wanted to do their part to fix the education problems in the US. Unfortunately, most of those classmates ended up burning out within 5 years and leaving to pursue careers where they won’t face the same levels of extreme micromanagement, extreme disrespect, bureaucracy, etc.</p>
I think you just don’t know enough people. Don’t you know any lawyers?</p>
<p>Following up on what Pizzagirl said, there are rich kids at lots of schools–and I think there may be less distinction between the haves and have-nots at the most selective private schools than there is at state universities, because (at least at most of the Ivies, for example) everybody lives and eats together, and success in on-campus activities is what impresses others.</p>
<p>You seem to have a low opinion of teachers. Every teacher my kids had, esp. in middle school and up, got a degree in his/her field of interest (math, history, biology, etc.) then a master’s in education, and yes, some were Ivy grads. Don’t get why you think that’s not worthy of respect.</p>
<p>My daughter is salutatorian, NMF, has 2340 SATs, is heading to Wellesley, and thinks she wants to be a teacher, though probably at the university level. We support her in this career choice.</p>
<p>The same thing could be said of the poor kid who goes to Arizona State in-state and is surrounded by wealthy designer-clad kids from the midwest whose parents bought them condos and who fly to LA for the weekend as a matter of course. Or of the poor kid from downstate Illinois who goes to U of Illinois and is surrounded by wealthy kids from the North Shore suburbs of Chicago. This is not a HYPS problem. This is a life problem. There will be people richer than you whether you’re going to Arizona State, U of Illinois or Harvard. You can spend your time being jealous of it, or you can accept it as a fact of life, be happy for what other people have, and move on with your day.</p>
<p>I think the other point is that relatively few people actually “rub their wealth in someone else’s face.” Most people just go about living their lives in the style and manner to which they are accustomed. It’s common on CC to have someone say that they didn’t like a school (I’ll pick on GWU since that often gets mentioned) because the kids “flaunted their wealth.” Well, what did that mean? It meant that when the girl stood in line at Starbucks, she pulled her money out of a Kate Spade bag instead of a Target one. Is that “flaunting” wealth? Or is that just using a handbag for its intended purpose?</p>
<p>It’s a preference for a campus culture where conspicuous consumption isn’t openly practiced or better yet, strongly discouraged such as at my LAC(Oberlin)* when I attended as opposed to one where it’s encouraged such as at GWU or IME…NYU.</p>
<p>Fashionistas and those who enjoy telegraphing one’s conspicuous consumption…whether intentionally or not may prefer colleges where that is encouraged/commonplace as opposed to others where it isn’t encouraged/strongly discouraged unless they go in with open eyes and understand they’ll stick out like a sore thumb. </p>
<p>Likewise, the same could be applied in the opposite way for students who aren’t fashionably/conspicuous consumption inclined. </p>
<ul>
<li>To be fair, Oberlin has become much more mainstream since I graduated in the late '90s so I’ve noticed/seen that some fashionable conspicuous consumption(Hipsters) has shown up on younger alums/current students. Factors which seem to drive some hardcore older alums I’ve met IRL and on the Alum magazine to feel that Oberlin is losing its radical progressive identity. Personally, I don’t care one way or another though personally…I enjoyed a campus experience where one can get away with being extremely low-maintenance clothes-wise…even to the point of wearing hole-ridden clothes and actually being praised for it for other students to join in the trend. :)</li>
</ul>
<p>But there’s nothing “conspicious consumption” about the simple act of (in this case) opening a handbag to pay for a coffee. It doesn’t become more “conspicuous consumption” if it’s a Kate Spade handbag. It only becomes conspicuous if the person walks around saying, “oh, look, I’m digging in my KATE SPADE handbag to find the $2 for the coffee. Don’t you just hate it when you can’t find stuff in your KATE SPADE handbag?” Our hypothetical college student here is doing exactly what everyone else in the line is doing - paying for her coffee and moving on with her day. If someone else finds that simple act “conspicuous,” they’re the ones with the problem, ascribing motive when motive may not be there. </p>
<p>And anyway, cobrat, it’s just as “conspicuous” to deliberately wear hole-ridden clothes and adopt a poser, look-how-cool-I-am-attitude why-don’t-you-join-my-trend.</p>
<p>IME, most people who aren’t into conspicuous consumption or fashion would usually opt for a non-branded handbag or if they find one associated with conspicuous consumption…will do what they can to conceal the brand name/signifiers as best as possible. This applies whether we’re talking handbags, computers, or even electric guitars(some guitarists go so far as to sand off the high end “Fender” or “Gibson” brand names off of guitars costing $1500-$3000+.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You may have missed it from my prior posts, but I wasn’t wearing them to be a trendsetter. Those were mostly the only clothes had I had for most of my undergrad career due to low family finances.</p>
<p>Designer doesn’t necessarily equal “brand logo that is apparent to everyone across the room.” I deliberately chose Kate Spade as my example for a reason, as it’s a (reasonable, not super-high-end) designer brand that is not necessarily identifiable from across the room.</p>
There may be people who do this, but they aren’t people who “aren’t into conspicuous consumption.” They are people with some kind of reverse-snobbery attitude–they still want you to know that they have fancy stuff. Really rich people may not be into logos, but they may have lots of fancy stuff. They don’t care if you see the logo or not. Buying something for the logo is not what rich people do–except maybe some very nouveau riche people.</p>
<p>Not always. It’s more they bought the items because they’re high quality or something which fits with what they want…but they don’t want the baggage of conspicuous consumption…especially possibly making others uncomfortable. </p>
<p>This is especially the case with many talented musicians whose main concerns are whether you can play music well or at the very least, not a snob/jerk. IME, the ones who are really into the music won’t put down others for having low-mid end instruments…the ones who do are often perceived by such musicians as more instrument collectors or materialistically oriented amateurs who need to compensate for lack of musical talent. </p>
<p>While the ones I’ve known personally won’t always necessarily purchase low-mid end instruments, they won’t put down others for doing so and will shut down anyone who tries to snob others on that score. </p>
<p>I’m welcome to jam with them whether I come carrying my higher-end brand guitars or the low-end Squier Affinity Strat I picked up with a Crate practice amp for the grand total of $10 off CL. </p>
<p>Granted, they may not be thrilled by the tunes I turn out…but that’s more due to my extreme beginner status when it comes to playing…not the brand of the guitar.</p>
<p>cobrat, you know some people with very strange and complicated attitudes. I’ve known plenty of people with nice instruments (my son is a music major, and a guitar player), and I’ve never known anybody to hide what the instrument is. Mostly, they like to admire nice instruments that other people get. They post pictures of the new instrument on Facebook, and all their friends post, “Nice!” I guess this is a form of conspicuous consumption, in a way, but I don’t think it puts anybody down. All those guitar players are hoping to get a nicer guitar, eventually.</p>
