Cruel School?

nottslass_2

Fang wrote: »

Did you? It didn't do much for your language skills.

Do you have to work hard at being an a***, or does it come naturally ?

vaio

golden rule of MSE: be nice to all moneysavers (no matter how benighted their views are)

aka: play nicely children

if you don't the fun police will come and lock/delete what I think is an interesting and useful thread

Fang_3

nottslass wrote: »

Do you have to work hard at being an a***, or does it come naturally ?

It's made all the easier when the opportunity presents itself as often as it does.

GracieP

Fang wrote: »

Perhaps that's because those that earn that sort of money worked hard to get to a place where they can earn it and they are sick to the back teeth of people who haven't the sense to do anything moaning about how hard done by they are?

I don't think there are too many people in this part of the world who worked harder than someone like meritaten's dad would have done down a pit. I earn a fortune and I sit on my !!! all day, as does my husband. Not that I don't put the effort in but to imagine I work as hard in a month as a miner would in a day is laughable. Yet I earn so very much more, the world is just unfair like that. (I'm a writer, my husband works in film.)

My dad was a binman and my mum a sahm, but they saved every penny they had so they could put a deposit down on a house in a nice area. Then they spent years fixing it up bit-by-bit, as it was pretty run down when they bought it. They had their mortgage paid off by their mid-40s allowing my dad to retire early as he could live off his pension and his income as a musician. Not that that was ever the plan, my dad didn't start playing music until I was nearly grown up but when you have no debts and minimal living costs you are free to do whatever you want. So you can fire away and call my family scum all you want, it's a total load of crap. My dad worked his !!! off in a way that you could never, ever imagine.

I am however utterly puzzled as to how how you have reached the conclusion that poor children = disruptive, bad students. FYI, my family was as poor as any in this part of the world but I tested with advanced adult ability in literacy and mathematics at the age of 8, as did both of my brothers. (It's funny Dickens was mentioned up thread as A Tale of Two Cities was my favourite book back then.) The poorest person in the class can still be the best student. It's out of line for schools to effectively punish poor kids for not being able to afford what others can.

GracieP

trickytrolleys wrote: »

^^^^^ i'm not being intolerant atall and have myself lived at both ends of the spectrum but I have NEVER myself, nor have I ever come across any family who are so poor that African villages would feel obliged to have a whipround.

You are missing the point in a very big way. My childhood was awesome. My parents treated me with respect and kept us aware of our financial situation and allowed me to make my own financial decisions with my money. We never went without anything we needed and we had plenty that we wanted. We just understood that getting one thing meant not getting something else.

As for the African villages comment. I've spent years working for third world charities and have dealt with poverty on a terrifying scale. I don't find your facetiousness overly amusing.:(

Fang_3

GracieP wrote: »

I don't think there are too many people in this part of the world who worked harder than someone like meritaten's dad would have done down a pit. I earn a fortune and I sit on my !!! all day, as does my husband. Not that I don't put the effort in but to imagine I work as hard in a month as a miner would in a day is laughable. Yet I earn so very much more, the world is just unfair like that. (I'm a writer, my husband works in film.)

My dad was a binman and my mum a sahm, but they saved every penny they had so they could put a deposit down on a house in a nice area. Then they spent years fixing it up bit-by-bit, as it was pretty run down when they bought it. They had their mortgage paid off by their mid-40s allowing my dad to retire early as he could live off his pension and his income as a musician. Not that that was ever the plan, my dad didn't start playing music until I was nearly grown up but when you have no debts and minimal living costs you are free to do whatever you want. So you can fire away and call my family scum all you want, it's a total load of crap. My dad worked his !!! off in a way that you could never, ever imagine.

I am however utterly puzzled as to how how you have reached the conclusion that poor children = disruptive, bad students. FYI, my family was as poor as any in this part of the world but I tested with advanced adult ability in literacy and mathematics at the age of 8, as did both of my brothers. (It's funny Dickens was mentioned up thread as A Tale of Two Cities was my favourite book back then.) The poorest person in the class can still be the best student. It's out of line for schools to effectively punish poor kids for not being able to afford what others can.

You're missing my point. I've not drawn the conclusion that poor = bad. I've drawn the conclusion that in my experience often it is bad parents that don't work through choice, and it those parents that don't want to make sacrifices that then allow their children to disrupt others. They are the scum.

I actually have to disagree with you on the subject of hard work. If you're talking physical hard work then I agree, but being mentally exhausted is just as bad. There's not really anything mentally taxing about being a miner, but with writing there is.

meg72

janninew wrote: »

Why the need to keep calling these children 'babies?' I know it makes it sound more emotive, but 3 and 4 year olds are children, not babies!! Sorry to go off topic slightly but it was bugging me a little!!

In my post I called these little more than babies, OK stand corrected they are children. no need to sound more emotive surely.
They are very very young children. In my day they wouldnt even have been at school. Do you expect a 3-4 year old to understand financial things, I dont, they were the ones punished by not attending the show, not the parents. Although if if was just an oversight I do the the parents will punish themselves when they realise what happened.

Surely a three to four year old is entitled to be innocent of these matters and cared for by all of society. The show was already paid for. Why the need to so publically remove these little ones, if that is a more acceptable description of them. For christs sake they will learn soon enough of the lack of money.

IT WAS WRONG TO WRONG TO DRAW ATTENTION TO THESE CHILDREN IN SUCH A PUBLIC WAY

Fang_3

meg72 wrote: »

In my post I called these little more than babies, OK stand corrected they are children. no need to sound more emotive surely.
They are very very young children. In my day they wouldnt even have been at school. Do you expect a 3-4 year old to understand financial things, I dont, they were the ones punished by not attending the show, not the parents. Although if if was just an oversight I do the the parents will punish themselves when they realise what happened.

Surely a three to four year old is entitled to be innocent of these matters and cared for by all of society. The show was already paid for. Why the need to so publically remove these little ones, if that is a more acceptable description of them. For christs sake they will learn soon enough of the lack of money.

IT WAS WRONG TO WRONG TO DRAW ATTENTION TO THESE CHILDREN IN SUCH A PUBLIC WAY

Because the parents that didn't pay loudly made a point of it, forcing the school's hand.

King_Drax_I

It's a disgrace. No doubt the school has forgotten about all the postage they have saved by making the same little ones carry home all the school notes they're given, and expected to remember, and get shouted at if they don't remember....

I would post something ruder but it would get removed, and I'll get banned.

I'm thinking it, though! <evil grin>

meg72

galvanizersbaby wrote: »

I think for this thread the age of the children is largely irrelevant due to the fact that this situation has occurred in an actual state school with a pre-school nursery class attached.

Where I am there are no such schools - for pre school children there are private nurseries or playgroups type set ups - I only have experience of a private nursery.

If this situation had cropped up in a private nursery or playgroup I'm not sure what the response would be - maybe the same? not sure?

I have not seen children excluded in this way (that's not to say they haven't been) in my children's school so far (they are only aged 6 and 7) but there is a little girl in DS's class that has the sort of parents which I think Fang is referring to in his posts and on the first school trip she was included but didn't arrive with the necessary packed lunch (this is usually provided by the school for her but the coach was leaving before the lunch delivery)) so I gave her my own packed lunch (make myself one for work every day) and ran to the shop to get her a drink - she looked so upset when the teacher explained she had to have a lunch with her and whoever had brought her to school that day hadn't hung around - she was 5 at the time - it is a shame

Bless you for caring about this little one.