<p>Mini, when you say that kids who can afford it will care less about having to pay, you are lumping any kid of means with a broad stroke. While some well to do kids might have that attitude, MANY would not, when it comes to money and values, etc. I think berurah’s analogy is apt. It would be like saying that everyone on welfare or Pell Grants is looking for a hand out, when that clearly is not the case. There are some who do. But there are many who very much don’t want ot have to receive assistance. Many on here really do see a STRONG bias that you project about any kid who is not on financial aid and has a comfortable level of financial status. Not all kids have the attitudes you are assigning them, money or not. That goes for the rich and the poor. You also talk a lot about kids at presitigious schools as being the drinkers, etc. In my own experience, a lot of the kids that I know who are party kids, are the ones who are NOT at prestigious schools. The kids I know who lead very demanding lives academically and extracurricularly are the not the “drunks”. This is not absolute by any means but is an example of the broad strokes you brush as not being all encompassing and in fact, are very biased and full of stereotypes. For someone who likes to look out for the little guy and the less fortunate, it is startling to see such a use of stereotype. As berurah says, my kids know a LOT of wealthy kids and most of these kids do not ACT spoiled or “not caring” about things like this. Some might, just like in ANY group.</p>
<p>doubleplay I think it depends on the community
when my D was in elementary school- my H was laid off- another family offered ( the school) to pay our tutition- I never knew who it was but I suspect
However- we did have some savings and other income so we were able to scrape up what aid didn’t cover
At the same school there were a very few people who might have judged us on how big our house was or what we did for a living- since the kids all took turns at each others houses, it was common knowledge who lived in an 8,000 sq ft house on the water & who lived in a duplex in the Udistrict- but seriously most of the kids were great.</p>
<p>It wasn’t until my younger daughter started going to public school, that I had kids make comments about how small our house was.</p>
<p>One of the wealthiest families I know ( as long as I have known them- they haven’t worked- for pay- they do go to stockholder meetings to manage the company though) live fairly frugally- they have 5 kids- what did they need a housekeeper for? ;)</p>
<p>as a result- the kids are pretty aware of the value of a dollar and hard work & I don’t doubt that if there was puke on the floor that was a safety hazard they would have gotten a mop and cleaned it up</p>
<p>Since the topic seems to have switched to rich kids and their ethics – I would probably put myself in that category in college, since I didn’t have to work during term time or contribute toward my expenses. But my whole life, I have been cheap as dirt and stubborn as hell, and I would have gone to war with the college over an unfairly imposed $60 fine, even though I could easily afford to pay.</p>
<p>I do agree with mini to the extent that a kid busting his butt in work-study is less likely to be the one puking in other people’s space.</p>
<p>
EK~</p>
<p>I agree…but I’ll take it a step further. I think it depends upon the individual choices of the kids, with whom they choose to interact. </p>
<p>Our house is by FAR, the most “lived in” and messy of all of the people’s we know, but it is where EVERYONE wants to be. They’re pretty darned accustomed to moving the stuff off the couch if they want to sit down! <em>lololol</em> </p>
<p>We in our family just have a keen eye for the <em>real</em> people and stick with them, regardless of their SES status.</p>
<p>~berurah</p>
<p>It seems to me all Mini is saying is that the fine will have a bigger effect on a less well off student than a wealthy one. This does seem self-evident to me, too. It doesn’t make the wealthy one callous, but it does mean that it’s less likely to be a big deal.</p>
<p>That doesn’t mean that there should be a sliding scale for fines, and he didn’t say that. He said, and I agree, that this is one reason that a collective fine on people who are not responsible is wrong.</p>
<p>garland~</p>
<p>If that is all that mini was saying, then it was also misinterpreted by Hanna…see below:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I just can’t imagine someone so ill they couldn’t make it to the toilet and have no one notice.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It happened to my son at college. He got a stomach bug during finals week and woke up needing to vomit at about 6 am. He made it only as far as the sink. Nobody else was in the bathroom. Indeed, considering the time of day, it is likely that nobody else in the building was awake. He cleaned up what he could but discovered that he had clogged the sink drain. So he called the maintenance people and explained the problem, with profuse apologies. Nobody noticed the entire incident, and there was no fine and no charge added to his bursar’s bill.</p>
<p>There are typically problems with collective punishment. This is just one example.</p>
<p>
This is what civilized people do. He could have left the clog for others to deal with and avoided the embarassment of explaining to maintenance. But he has a conscience. And proper disinfection helped reduce the likelihood of the bug spreading. </p>
<p>Obviously he was not raised in a wealthy home!</p>
<p>Garland, yes, you are right and so is mini that it is more of a burden for someone to pay the fine who does not have the means than for someone who does. The reactions, I believe, have to do with comments such as “they could care less”. How much someone has in their bank account isn’t always a reflection of their values and attitudes.</p>
<p>StickerShock wrote of the civilized son with a conscience:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>LOL! :D</p>
<p>(like berurah, my kids are not wealthy and are on financial aid, though not poor by any means, but I still think the attitudes of some toward those who are of means is over the top and stereotypical)</p>
<p>
<em>giggle</em> :D</p>
<p>
EXACTLY!</p>
<p>mini~</p>
<p>You can split semantic hairs all day, but it doesn’t change the essence of what you said here, which is consistent with what you’ve said for as long as I can remember on this forum. If you feel a certain way, that’s cool with me. Just don’t say something and then deny the very obvious meaning of it.</p>
<p>~berurah</p>
<p>If being poor doesn’t make you noble ( and it doesnt) being wealthy doesn’t make you without morals
*Just as intelligence and beauty can actually co-exist despite the protests from those who haven’t either gift
*</p>
<p>Rich or Poor; Less than good dorm security; No one steps up to take responsibility so everyone takes the hit. I’d be outa there ASAP. Happen once-it may happen again, and itstoomuch for me.</p>
<p>Hey garland, all I was suggesting is that the OP’s son may have misunderstood the RA’s decision. It happens all the time and it seems that, in this case, it is a distinct possibility.</p>