s/o how can swim clubs be more inlcusive

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:charge on a sliding scale. If you earn 1m, you pay $10,000. You earn 100k, you pay $1000. You earn 60k, you pay $200, etc.

No one would ever agree to this. I think most have funds that can supplement someone who can’t fully pay but this doesn’t fix the problem either. Oh, and your suggestion fails to consider those who retire early, have lower earnings, but large assets. Sure the assets will produce passive income, but maybe not as much as wage earners with less assets.

A couple bringing in $1,000,000 per year would never agree to paying more than the poors on a sliding scale? Well, then you better quit private school and forget college, it's all income and needs based, but we're talking about a lot more than 10k per year for full pay families. But hey, that's not fair-rrrrr, so don't participate.

1. How are you verifying income? Do you really expect people to give their tax returns to the local swim club?

2. 10k per year for a swim club? Our swim club (which also has year-round tennis and other activities) is more in the range of $800/year per family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one has mentioned this on here yet, but timing matters too. My kids have two working parents. Swim club times don't work for us at all (either too early, too late, hours not long enough, not combined with a camp afterwards so we have care until 4pm, too much on weekdays and not enough on weekends, etc). I think that's the real issue. My local swim club is cheap and I believe it's inclusive, but you need a SAHM to make it possible.

This.

I disagree. There are many families in our neighborhood where both parents work and the kids are active on swim and dive. Instead of putting the kids in summer camp they hire a summer nanny (cheaper than summer camp for 2 kids). Many families share a nanny. The kids are at the pool all morning then spend the afternoon doing activities with their nanny (we find local college students majoring in education).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one has mentioned this on here yet, but timing matters too. My kids have two working parents. Swim club times don't work for us at all (either too early, too late, hours not long enough, not combined with a camp afterwards so we have care until 4pm, too much on weekdays and not enough on weekends, etc). I think that's the real issue. My local swim club is cheap and I believe it's inclusive, but you need a SAHM to make it possible.

This.

I disagree. There are many families in our neighborhood where both parents work and the kids are active on swim and dive. Instead of putting the kids in summer camp they hire a summer nanny (cheaper than summer camp for 2 kids). Many families share a nanny. The kids are at the pool all morning then spend the afternoon doing activities with their nanny (we find local college students majoring in education).

Check your privilege. A summer nanny is not cheaper than county Parks and Recs camps, especially if the family qualifies for low income discounts.

Not to mention many kids don't have a nanny at all by the time they're old enough for swim. Those kids just stay home alone all summer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one has mentioned this on here yet, but timing matters too. My kids have two working parents. Swim club times don't work for us at all (either too early, too late, hours not long enough, not combined with a camp afterwards so we have care until 4pm, too much on weekdays and not enough on weekends, etc). I think that's the real issue. My local swim club is cheap and I believe it's inclusive, but you need a SAHM to make it possible.

This.

I disagree. There are many families in our neighborhood where both parents work and the kids are active on swim and dive. Instead of putting the kids in summer camp they hire a summer nanny (cheaper than summer camp for 2 kids). Many families share a nanny. The kids are at the pool all morning then spend the afternoon doing activities with their nanny (we find local college students majoring in education).

Check your privilege. A summer nanny is not cheaper than county Parks and Recs camps, especially if the family qualifies for low income discounts.

Not to mention many kids don't have a nanny at all by the time they're old enough for swim. Those kids just stay home alone all summer.

Check your privilege checking. PP was responding to the quote at the top of this post, which had nothing to with any cost issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one has mentioned this on here yet, but timing matters too. My kids have two working parents. Swim club times don't work for us at all (either too early, too late, hours not long enough, not combined with a camp afterwards so we have care until 4pm, too much on weekdays and not enough on weekends, etc). I think that's the real issue. My local swim club is cheap and I believe it's inclusive, but you need a SAHM to make it possible.

This.

I disagree. There are many families in our neighborhood where both parents work and the kids are active on swim and dive. Instead of putting the kids in summer camp they hire a summer nanny (cheaper than summer camp for 2 kids). Many families share a nanny. The kids are at the pool all morning then spend the afternoon doing activities with their nanny (we find local college students majoring in education).

Check your privilege. A summer nanny is not cheaper than county Parks and Recs camps, especially if the family qualifies for low income discounts.

Not to mention many kids don't have a nanny at all by the time they're old enough for swim. Those kids just stay home alone all summer.

Check your privilege checking. PP was responding to the quote at the top of this post, which had nothing to with any cost issue.

It has everything to do with the prior post. Your response was ridiculous. She said she can't make the swim schedule work with her family's work schedule. Your suggestion was a NANNY. That's an impossible expense for many families. You clearly have zero perspective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one has mentioned this on here yet, but timing matters too. My kids have two working parents. Swim club times don't work for us at all (either too early, too late, hours not long enough, not combined with a camp afterwards so we have care until 4pm, too much on weekdays and not enough on weekends, etc). I think that's the real issue. My local swim club is cheap and I believe it's inclusive, but you need a SAHM to make it possible.

This.

I disagree. There are many families in our neighborhood where both parents work and the kids are active on swim and dive. Instead of putting the kids in summer camp they hire a summer nanny (cheaper than summer camp for 2 kids). Many families share a nanny. The kids are at the pool all morning then spend the afternoon doing activities with their nanny (we find local college students majoring in education).

Check your privilege. A summer nanny is not cheaper than county Parks and Recs camps, especially if the family qualifies for low income discounts.

Not to mention many kids don't have a nanny at all by the time they're old enough for swim. Those kids just stay home alone all summer.

Check your privilege checking. PP was responding to the quote at the top of this post, which had nothing to with any cost issue.

It has everything to do with the prior post. Your response was ridiculous. She said she can't make the swim schedule work with her family's work schedule. Your suggestion was a NANNY. That's an impossible expense for many families. You clearly have zero perspective.

1. Irrespective of whether I have any perspective, I didn’t write the prior post. So you are pointing the finger at the wrong person.

2. The original post in this sub-chain was based on the premise that scheduling and not cost was the primary impediment to greater participation. Irrespective of whether one agrees with that, the PP to whom you responded with “check your privilege” wrote that there is a solution if schedule and not cost are the issue.

3. What PP was referring to as a “summer nanny” is really more of a glorified babysitter. I have no idea if it’s cheaper than camp to do that. But it’s certainly less expensive than a real nanny. More important — and to repeat — PP was addressing a post that dealt with schedule and not cost.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one has mentioned this on here yet, but timing matters too. My kids have two working parents. Swim club times don't work for us at all (either too early, too late, hours not long enough, not combined with a camp afterwards so we have care until 4pm, too much on weekdays and not enough on weekends, etc). I think that's the real issue. My local swim club is cheap and I believe it's inclusive, but you need a SAHM to make it possible.

This.

I disagree. There are many families in our neighborhood where both parents work and the kids are active on swim and dive. Instead of putting the kids in summer camp they hire a summer nanny (cheaper than summer camp for 2 kids). Many families share a nanny. The kids are at the pool all morning then spend the afternoon doing activities with their nanny (we find local college students majoring in education).

Check your privilege. A summer nanny is not cheaper than county Parks and Recs camps, especially if the family qualifies for low income discounts.

Not to mention many kids don't have a nanny at all by the time they're old enough for swim. Those kids just stay home alone all summer.

Check your privilege checking. PP was responding to the quote at the top of this post, which had nothing to with any cost issue.

It has everything to do with the prior post. Your response was ridiculous. She said she can't make the swim schedule work with her family's work schedule. Your suggestion was a NANNY. That's an impossible expense for many families. You clearly have zero perspective.

1. Irrespective of whether I have any perspective, I didn’t write the prior post. So you are pointing the finger at the wrong person.

2. The original post in this sub-chain was based on the premise that scheduling and not cost was the primary impediment to greater participation. Irrespective of whether one agrees with that, the PP to whom you responded with “check your privilege” wrote that there is a solution if schedule and not cost are the issue.

3. What PP was referring to as a “summer nanny” is really more of a glorified babysitter. I have no idea if it’s cheaper than camp to do that. But it’s certainly less expensive than a real nanny. More important — and to repeat — PP was addressing a post that dealt with schedule and not cost.

Of course schedule issues for transporting kids can be solved with unlimited resources. Now if only people had unlimited resources....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:charge on a sliding scale. If you earn 1m, you pay $10,000. You earn 100k, you pay $1000. You earn 60k, you pay $200, etc.

No one would ever agree to this. I think most have funds that can supplement someone who can’t fully pay but this doesn’t fix the problem either. Oh, and your suggestion fails to consider those who retire early, have lower earnings, but large assets. Sure the assets will produce passive income, but maybe not as much as wage earners with less assets.

A couple bringing in $1,000,000 per year would never agree to paying more than the poors on a sliding scale? Well, then you better quit private school and forget college, it's all income and needs based, but we're talking about a lot more than 10k per year for full pay families. But hey, that's not fair-rrrrr, so don't participate.

No, they would not. An equivalent service should come with an equivalent price. Would you expect to pay more for a stamp, sandwich, or tutor, just because you can? You’re an idiot if you say you would. Btw: I’ll be full pay for my kids’ college and that’s fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a person of color. Swimming just isn’t a black peoples sport. Go into the “hood” and you will see black people playing football and basketball. Turn on their tv and they are watching football and basketball. What are they wearing? Football and basketball jerseys. It’s just not a black peoples sport by interest. Call me ignorant all you want but we spend a lot of money doing braids and our hair. We aren’t getting it wet! Combine that with our kids coming out the pool looking ashy.

You are ignorant. Go into the “hood” and you will see plenty of Black people at the public pool. We need to invest more in teaching them how to swim. I am also Black, btw.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one has mentioned this on here yet, but timing matters too. My kids have two working parents. Swim club times don't work for us at all (either too early, too late, hours not long enough, not combined with a camp afterwards so we have care until 4pm, too much on weekdays and not enough on weekends, etc). I think that's the real issue. My local swim club is cheap and I believe it's inclusive, but you need a SAHM to make it possible.

This.

+1000. I very much would like my kids to be able to do summer swim at our pool but the timing of their practice makes this impossible with two parents who both work in the office, not at home. They’re in different at age groups so to be able to take them both to practice one of us realistically wouldn’t get to work until about 11:00. I’ve mentioned it to our pool board and was told, “Yeah, we get that a lot.” And that was about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a person of color. Swimming just isn’t a black peoples sport. Go into the “hood” and you will see black people playing football and basketball. Turn on their tv and they are watching football and basketball. What are they wearing? Football and basketball jerseys. It’s just not a black peoples sport by interest. Call me ignorant all you want but we spend a lot of money doing braids and our hair. We aren’t getting it wet! Combine that with our kids coming out the pool looking ashy.

I went to a top private school in DC and whenever we had racial sensitivity workshops or town meetings the African American girls would always bring up lower school swimming as an example of racism. They argued that black girls should be exempt from swim class because it was bad for their hair .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:charge on a sliding scale. If you earn 1m, you pay $10,000. You earn 100k, you pay $1000. You earn 60k, you pay $200, etc.

No one would ever agree to this. I think most have funds that can supplement someone who can’t fully pay but this doesn’t fix the problem either. Oh, and your suggestion fails to consider those who retire early, have lower earnings, but large assets. Sure the assets will produce passive income, but maybe not as much as wage earners with less assets.

A couple bringing in $1,000,000 per year would never agree to paying more than the poors on a sliding scale? Well, then you better quit private school and forget college, it's all income and needs based, but we're talking about a lot more than 10k per year for full pay families. But hey, that's not fair-rrrrr, so don't participate.

1. How are you verifying income? Do you really expect people to give their tax returns to the local swim club?

2. 10k per year for a swim club? Our swim club (which also has year-round tennis and other activities) is more in the range of $800/year per family.

Ours too. We have a huge very competitive team at our pool and it's less than 800 for a family membership. Not sure what 10k gets you lol.

And we are two working parents who find time to shuttle and carpool our kids as necessary.

[Anonymous]

The head coaches in most of the pools we see are always white with very few exceptions. I don't really understand why.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one has mentioned this on here yet, but timing matters too. My kids have two working parents. Swim club times don't work for us at all (either too early, too late, hours not long enough, not combined with a camp afterwards so we have care until 4pm, too much on weekdays and not enough on weekends, etc). I think that's the real issue. My local swim club is cheap and I believe it's inclusive, but you need a SAHM to make it possible.

This.

I disagree. There are many families in our neighborhood where both parents work and the kids are active on swim and dive. Instead of putting the kids in summer camp they hire a summer nanny (cheaper than summer camp for 2 kids). Many families share a nanny. The kids are at the pool all morning then spend the afternoon doing activities with their nanny (we find local college students majoring in education).

Check your privilege. A summer nanny is not cheaper than county Parks and Recs camps, especially if the family qualifies for low income discounts.

Not to mention many kids don't have a nanny at all by the time they're old enough for swim. Those kids just stay home alone all summer.

Check your privilege checking. PP was responding to the quote at the top of this post, which had nothing to with any cost issue.

It has everything to do with the prior post. Your response was ridiculous. She said she can't make the swim schedule work with her family's work schedule. Your suggestion was a NANNY. That's an impossible expense for many families. You clearly have zero perspective.

1. Irrespective of whether I have any perspective, I didn’t write the prior post. So you are pointing the finger at the wrong person.

2. The original post in this sub-chain was based on the premise that scheduling and not cost was the primary impediment to greater participation. Irrespective of whether one agrees with that, the PP to whom you responded with “check your privilege” wrote that there is a solution if schedule and not cost are the issue.

3. What PP was referring to as a “summer nanny” is really more of a glorified babysitter. I have no idea if it’s cheaper than camp to do that. But it’s certainly less expensive than a real nanny. More important — and to repeat — PP was addressing a post that dealt with schedule and not cost.

Of course schedule issues for transporting kids can be solved with unlimited resources. Now if only people had unlimited resources....

Exactly. A college student who we split with another family AND the cost is cheaper than putting all the kids in county camps. Geez. It was something my kids really wanted to do and we made it work in a cost effective way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I live in a very diverse area of MoCo but our swim clubs (which are not geographically restricted) are not as diverse as the neighborhoods. Membership is expensive. I know plenty of non-diverse people who don't join them because they think the county pools are a better deal, they aren't that into swimming, two working parents, etc. These swim clubs were founded to keep POC out, so, there is a history to overcome.

I agree with this. I live in Burtonsville, it’s very diverse. But the private pools near us are majority white. My child is black and was one of three black kids on swim team this year. We both work but do shift work so can get her there. The public pool near us, MLK has mainly black people there. It’s a shame, i don’t know what the answer is.