I don't understand parents who are flashy with their wealth but send their kids to public school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here.

Yes, I'm being so judgmental! And I feel guilty about it. But, I just don't understand it. It's the FLASHY part I don't get.

Meh, maybe they like all those things. Or they like showing off their wealth but, as PP noted, it's MUCH cheaper to have all those things than to afford private school for multiple kids.

It's okay to be judgmental sometimes, I think, as long as you don't act like a jerk about it. A thread like this doesn't qualify for that, while being snotty to these women IRL would. At least IMO.

[Anonymous]

I think you're working from the assumption that independent schools are always better than public schools, therefore if you have the money you would always put it toward private school tuition. For many of us that's just not true. For example, my FIL offered to pay tuition at a school of our choosing, but we prefer the charter school my child attends. Handbag cost/brand has nothing to do with our choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm in N. Arlington and frankly there are a lot of moms of a certain type: they all have YSL logo handbags, huge diamond rings and other expensive jewelry, often blonde hair, expensive clothing, etc. And they all send their kids to public school.

The thing that I find weird is not just that they spend a lot of money on things other than tuition (private school is crazy expensive, and I understand the choice to go public) but that they seem to spend money on things that make them LOOK wealthy but they are obviously not that wealthy since their kids go public. I see a lot of expensive handbags at my kids' private school, but they are almost always Celine or Tod's or Ferragamo or other less flashy brands than a YSL logo, and plenty of the richest families drive a minivan (so practical, no matter how lame) whereas these public school moms in N. Arlington are so often in flashier luxury cars.

I'm trying hard not be judgmental, but I just don't understand the culture of being really flashy with money (I mean, I don't like YSL handbags for that reason to begin with) and I especially don't understand it among people who send their kids to public school.

I'm sure I hit a lot of buttons with this post, I'm just wondering if anyone else has observed what I have.

Logic isn't your first language, is it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Your premise is wrong. There are plenty of wealthy families who PREFER public school over private school.

I am a product of excellent European private schools. Today, none of the still-excellent schools I went to are nearly as expensive as the DC area privates. I simply do not want to give money to the latter, which will go to luxurious facilities, athletics, administrators pockets, maintenance of those acres of pristine environmentally-unfriendly lawns and unnecessary tech in every classroom... when private school teachers are really not great because they are paid less than public school teachers. It's very easy to have good academic results when you select at entry. If the money went to excellent teachers, I would reconsider. But it doesn't, and it never will in this country.

Our kids have been in public and private in this area and the teachers at the high end private have overall been WAY better educators (many have PhDs in their subjects and are passionate about the kids and way more focused on thoughtful classroom discussion/critical thinking skills) than the public school teachers at the high school level - the public school teachers are burned out from huge classrooms and disruptive students and teaching to the SOL etc. Our kids complained they often discourage discussion. While I agree that teachers in public are paid more and have better benefits overall, that doesn't make them better as teachers at all. Also, a lot of that fancy stuff you mention at privates is actually paid for by the wealthiest families/alums through fundraising/capital campaigns. Your logic is flawed. However, I agree that to each his/her own. Public can be awesome for some kids, while private is better for others.

[Anonymous]

Does everyone realize that teachers that work in private school don't even need to be certified and make less money? Most are trying hard to get into public schools to make more money but they aren't getting selected. Private schools aren't better- just good at keeping the kids you don't want your kids to go to school with out.

[Anonymous]

Does everyone realize that teachers that work in private school don't even need to be certified and make less money? Most are trying hard to get into public schools to make more money but they aren't getting selected. Private schools aren't better- just good at keeping the kids you don't want your kids to go to school with out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think this whole line of thinking is pointless because everyone should do what feels right for their family. But I will bite anyhow.

Yes, there are status conscious families in N Arl who have all the bells and whistles, the tasteful modern home (that isn't too large), the vacations, jewelry, clothes and whatever they want. I think they choose public because they want to seem "normal" and want their kids to grow up that way. You can buy a couple luxury handbags, take a European ski vacation and have a high car payment for far less than it costs to send 2 kids to private school, so I'm not sure all of them could afford it in a heartbeat. For those who can afford it, perhaps they're saving up for college, do not feel their child would enjoy/thrive in private or many other reasons.

I just think they prefer to spend more money on themselves and spend more time socializing with the other yuppie locals rather than spending it on the best education for their children. It's not what you know but who you know. Don't overthink it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm in N. Arlington and frankly there are a lot of moms of a certain type: they all have YSL logo handbags, huge diamond rings and other expensive jewelry, often blonde hair, expensive clothing, etc. And they all send their kids to public school.

The thing that I find weird is not just that they spend a lot of money on things other than tuition (private school is crazy expensive, and I understand the choice to go public) but that they seem to spend money on things that make them LOOK wealthy but they are obviously not that wealthy since their kids go public. I see a lot of expensive handbags at my kids' private school, but they are almost always Celine or Tod's or Ferragamo or other less flashy brands than a YSL logo, and plenty of the richest families drive a minivan (so practical, no matter how lame) whereas these public school moms in N. Arlington are so often in flashier luxury cars.

I'm trying hard not be judgmental, but I just don't understand the culture of being really flashy with money (I mean, I don't like YSL handbags for that reason to begin with) and I especially don't understand it among people who send their kids to public school.

I'm sure I hit a lot of buttons with this post, I'm just wondering if anyone else has observed what I have.

Logic isn't your first language, is it?

Sorry, but the vast majority of families in the DC area with either family money or who make 7 figures + a year send their kids to private school. Yes, there are exceptions. Of course there are. But not enough to make it "illogical" to conclude that the vast majority of public school parents are not from significant family money or have a 7 figure plus HHI.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does everyone realize that teachers that work in private school don't even need to be certified and make less money? Most are trying hard to get into public schools to make more money but they aren't getting selected. Private schools aren't better- just good at keeping the kids you don't want your kids to go to school with out.

True - they don't need to be certified by the gazillion schools that offer certification. Instead they often have advanced degrees from quality schools, and are happy to trade a modest amount of income for other perks and benefits of teaching at a private school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this whole line of thinking is pointless because everyone should do what feels right for their family. But I will bite anyhow.

Yes, there are status conscious families in N Arl who have all the bells and whistles, the tasteful modern home (that isn't too large), the vacations, jewelry, clothes and whatever they want. I think they choose public because they want to seem "normal" and want their kids to grow up that way. You can buy a couple luxury handbags, take a European ski vacation and have a high car payment for far less than it costs to send 2 kids to private school, so I'm not sure all of them could afford it in a heartbeat. For those who can afford it, perhaps they're saving up for college, do not feel their child would enjoy/thrive in private or many other reasons.

I just think they prefer to spend more money on themselves and spend more time socializing with the other yuppie locals rather than spending it on the best education for their children. It's not what you know but who you know. Don't overthink it.

And again: the unshakable assumption that the schools you prefer for your kids are the best and the schools they prefer for their kids are inferior. This is your read on the situation, but it is not universal, nor is it fact. Once you understand that different people have different kids with different needs, different priorities, and different opinions than your own, you'll be able to get through the day without being traumatized by the sight of a blonde public school mom with a YSL handbag.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your premise is wrong. There are plenty of wealthy families who PREFER public school over private school.

I am a product of excellent European private schools. Today, none of the still-excellent schools I went to are nearly as expensive as the DC area privates. I simply do not want to give money to the latter, which will go to luxurious facilities, athletics, administrators pockets, maintenance of those acres of pristine environmentally-unfriendly lawns and unnecessary tech in every classroom... when private school teachers are really not great because they are paid less than public school teachers. It's very easy to have good academic results when you select at entry. If the money went to excellent teachers, I would reconsider. But it doesn't, and it never will in this country.

Our kids have been in public and private in this area and the teachers at the high end private have overall been WAY better educators (many have PhDs in their subjects and are passionate about the kids and way more focused on thoughtful classroom discussion/critical thinking skills) than the public school teachers at the high school level - the public school teachers are burned out from huge classrooms and disruptive students and teaching to the SOL etc. Our kids complained they often discourage discussion. While I agree that teachers in public are paid more and have better benefits overall, that doesn't make them better as teachers at all. Also, a lot of that fancy stuff you mention at privates is actually paid for by the wealthiest families/alums through fundraising/capital campaigns. Your logic is flawed. However, I agree that to each his/her own. Public can be awesome for some kids, while private is better for others.

They are largely the same teachers in public/private -- many go back and forth. But keep drinking that Kool-Aid.

[Anonymous]

you're assuming all wealthy families would prefer private school.

you're wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm in N. Arlington and frankly there are a lot of moms of a certain type: they all have YSL logo handbags, huge diamond rings and other expensive jewelry, often blonde hair, expensive clothing, etc. And they all send their kids to public school.

The thing that I find weird is not just that they spend a lot of money on things other than tuition (private school is crazy expensive, and I understand the choice to go public) but that they seem to spend money on things that make them LOOK wealthy but they are obviously not that wealthy since their kids go public. I see a lot of expensive handbags at my kids' private school, but they are almost always Celine or Tod's or Ferragamo or other less flashy brands than a YSL logo, and plenty of the richest families drive a minivan (so practical, no matter how lame) whereas these public school moms in N. Arlington are so often in flashier luxury cars.

I'm trying hard not be judgmental, but I just don't understand the culture of being really flashy with money (I mean, I don't like YSL handbags for that reason to begin with) and I especially don't understand it among people who send their kids to public school.

I'm sure I hit a lot of buttons with this post, I'm just wondering if anyone else has observed what I have.

Logic isn't your first language, is it?

Sorry, but the vast majority of families in the DC area with either family money or who make 7 figures + a year send their kids to private school. Yes, there are exceptions. Of course there are. But not enough to make it "illogical" to conclude that the vast majority of public school parents are not from significant family money or have a 7 figure plus HHI.

First, you have no way of knowing that, and making sweeping, unknowable assumptions to buttress your point is a sure sign that you're flailing around.

Second, even if it is true, you've actually demonstrated in your response that you don't understand logic. The fact that a kid goes to public school does not mean that her parents "obviously" are not wealthy. In fact, there's a logical fallacy that specifically addresses this - it's called the "No true Scotsman" fallacy. Look it up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think this whole line of thinking is pointless because everyone should do what feels right for their family. But I will bite anyhow.

Yes, there are status conscious families in N Arl who have all the bells and whistles, the tasteful modern home (that isn't too large), the vacations, jewelry, clothes and whatever they want. I think they choose public because they want to seem "normal" and want their kids to grow up that way. You can buy a couple luxury handbags, take a European ski vacation and have a high car payment for far less than it costs to send 2 kids to private school, so I'm not sure all of them could afford it in a heartbeat. For those who can afford it, perhaps they're saving up for college, do not feel their child would enjoy/thrive in private or many other reasons.

+1

Having enough money to buy a few status items is not the same as having $40K-$80K a year to send kids to private schools.

And LOL at the idea that all the really rich people at privates are driving minivans. They are driving nice cars, too. Maybe they have a minivan AND a luxury sedan/SUV, and the nanny uses the minivan for dropoff. And they are carrying nice purses and wearing nice shoes, too, maybe just different labels. Which I'm quite sure they all recognize on each other, flashy logo or no.

I don't get being flashy with money at all, so I can't help you there.

[Anonymous]

I live in North Arlington, carry an expensive purse, have a large engagement ring and highlighted hair. My kids will go to public school because my husband and I believe that is what’s best not just for our kids, but all kids. We will contribute both time and money to school needs because we know not everyone can, but all kids deserve a good education. We don’t buy things we don’t need just because we can afford them.