If you are wealthy would you send your kids to a W school over private?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

+1
All these Feds working in the area are highly educated and smart, yet make no money.
It takes a lot more than education to be wealthy. The wealthy know that.

Lol at “no money”….. you must live in a bubble.

Making 200K a year each is nothing by my standards. Aim higher

DP
I use statistics, similar to what the government does. I think 2 educated working feds are squarely UMC. When one uses stats as cutoffs it doesn't really matter what others "think", because there are defined boundaries.

Perhaps top 1% of net worth for the DC area should be considered. That's over 20 million.

Happy slicing:
https://dqydj.com/income-by-city/
Or
https://dqydj.com/net-worth-percentile-calculator-united-states/

Also many calculators to slice by age, gender, and other demographics.

Upper class is usually defined above 5% or 2.5%, depending on which economist is publishing. Only looking at the top 1% is really myopic. But hey, do what you want and let others do the same. I trust the professionals in this field and normally go with 2.5 or 5 depending on the point I'm trying to make. Top 2.5% in DC is closer to NW of 7M and HHI of 650k.

"Wealthy" is usually defined by top quintile which would include dual Fed households in DC - NW 700k, HHI 225k.

So you can have a very narrowly defined group but it doesn't say anything about the population as a whole. Plus, it's not helpful to hurl insults the way some PPs did - not saying you specifically, but some did. It is helpful to define criteria and categorize appropriately.

At my country club a HHI of 1 to 1.5 million is about average. Same with a 7 to 12 million net worth. I get that may be a bubble. But I like that it pushes me to think bigger and achieve more.

That’s some impressive e-stats! In reality you might be a low level admin that riding the high of having just finished Ayn Rand. We’ll never know, although I think I’m guessing right. Your country club is pushing you to think bigger and achieve more??? I had a good laugh.

Regardless, as lame as it is, you’re just making a tired argument from authority, “I’m right because I’m rich” (or so you claim).

The core or your argument is that going to private school helps because you’re building a network with future rich people that may help you in your career. I’m somewhat doubtful about this, you build most of your network through professional contacts that work in your industry, how many people move their career through their high school classmates? I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, just that it’s not the norm at all.

There are legitimate reasons for sending a child to private (like being a good fit for their interest and personality), but setting them up for being rich in the future is not one of them. It sounds more wishful thinking on your side to be honest.

I agree with your post, but I think this guy is squarely publicly educated, wishes he belongs to a country club, and is writing from his parents basement. Clearly, he doesn't have the self awareness a well educated (public or private) person would have. And I know it's a guy, because I've never met a women so outwardly arrogant and stupid at the same time, even anonymously.

Public school educated, yes
My kids are in private now and fully appreciate the value.
I belong to a country club. One that has many famous people that the DCUM crowd fawn over.
And yes, I’m wealthy.
And, I’m a person of color.
I don’t live in a basement. Redfin lists my house as being worth 3.3 million. Thanks

You forgot to mention you also have a huge chip on your shoulder.

Of course no one can verify that what you say is true, and it absolutely brings nothing to the discussion. If anything it just accentuates your insecurities. What exactly is the point you are making here, that you’re rich? You’ve been saying this over the past few pages, but seriously, nobody cares.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

Exactly. The quality of education sucks. But that doesn’t matter.

Well.... no really.

It's a different type of education. If you want them to learn multi-variable Calculus (or difficult math in public school), I have to question why. I am a scientist and the last time I used it was to pass the AP exam in HS. On the other hand, if you want them to learn soft skills (learned in private schools), the last time I used that was today dealing with some colleagues. So which skills are more relevant? What exactly is an "education" to you?

In Spanish the phrase "mala educación" or "bad education" literally means poor manners. This idea of soft skills/ private school advantage transcends cultural boundaries and time. You can find similar things the world over.

You’re making it seem that public schools graduate only cave dwellers that only communicate through grunting, while private schools are graduating only smooth talker, peace prize material. Of course there’s no basis for this assumption.

The post doesn't sound like that. Of course there is some overlap between the two.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

+1
All these Feds working in the area are highly educated and smart, yet make no money.
It takes a lot more than education to be wealthy. The wealthy know that.

Lol at “no money”….. you must live in a bubble.

Making 200K a year each is nothing by my standards. Aim higher

DP
I use statistics, similar to what the government does. I think 2 educated working feds are squarely UMC. When one uses stats as cutoffs it doesn't really matter what others "think", because there are defined boundaries.

Perhaps top 1% of net worth for the DC area should be considered. That's over 20 million.

Happy slicing:
https://dqydj.com/income-by-city/
Or
https://dqydj.com/net-worth-percentile-calculator-united-states/

Also many calculators to slice by age, gender, and other demographics.

Upper class is usually defined above 5% or 2.5%, depending on which economist is publishing. Only looking at the top 1% is really myopic. But hey, do what you want and let others do the same. I trust the professionals in this field and normally go with 2.5 or 5 depending on the point I'm trying to make. Top 2.5% in DC is closer to NW of 7M and HHI of 650k.

"Wealthy" is usually defined by top quintile which would include dual Fed households in DC - NW 700k, HHI 225k.

So you can have a very narrowly defined group but it doesn't say anything about the population as a whole. Plus, it's not helpful to hurl insults the way some PPs did - not saying you specifically, but some did. It is helpful to define criteria and categorize appropriately.

At my country club a HHI of 1 to 1.5 million is about average. Same with a 7 to 12 million net worth. I get that may be a bubble. But I like that it pushes me to think bigger and achieve more.

That’s some impressive e-stats! In reality you might be a low level admin that riding the high of having just finished Ayn Rand. We’ll never know, although I think I’m guessing right. Your country club is pushing you to think bigger and achieve more??? I had a good laugh.

Regardless, as lame as it is, you’re just making a tired argument from authority, “I’m right because I’m rich” (or so you claim).

The core or your argument is that going to private school helps because you’re building a network with future rich people that may help you in your career. I’m somewhat doubtful about this, you build most of your network through professional contacts that work in your industry, how many people move their career through their high school classmates? I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, just that it’s not the norm at all.

There are legitimate reasons for sending a child to private (like being a good fit for their interest and personality), but setting them up for being rich in the future is not one of them. It sounds more wishful thinking on your side to be honest.

I agree with your post, but I think this guy is squarely publicly educated, wishes he belongs to a country club, and is writing from his parents basement. Clearly, he doesn't have the self awareness a well educated (public or private) person would have. And I know it's a guy, because I've never met a women so outwardly arrogant and stupid at the same time, even anonymously.

Most people with common sense realize that there are good reasons to go to public and good reasons to go to private and the decision will depend on the circumstances (financial and otherwise) of the child and family. Weigh the pros and cons and decide on your own. What’s really annoying is that afterwards people want to rationalize and convince themselves and others that indeed it was the best choice. Some arguments are really outlandish, like success in life is guaranteed in private, private schools are a waste of money, public schools are drug infested wastelands, the cream of the crop go to public etc.
None of that is true, but also sometimes people make the wrong choice. If you go any route it’s more helpful to explain the factors you considered and avoid hyperboles.

One of the most rational posts in the list thread. DCUM loves hyperbole!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

Exactly. The quality of education sucks. But that doesn’t matter.

Well.... no really.

It's a different type of education. If you want them to learn multi-variable Calculus (or difficult math in public school), I have to question why. I am a scientist and the last time I used it was to pass the AP exam in HS. On the other hand, if you want them to learn soft skills (learned in private schools), the last time I used that was today dealing with some colleagues. So which skills are more relevant? What exactly is an "education" to you?

In Spanish the phrase "mala educación" or "bad education" literally means poor manners. This idea of soft skills/ private school advantage transcends cultural boundaries and time. You can find similar things the world over.

You’re making it seem that public schools graduate only cave dwellers that only communicate through grunting, while private schools are graduating only smooth talker, peace prize material. Of course there’s no basis for this assumption.

The post doesn't sound like that. Of course there is some overlap between the two.

But what’s the basis to assert that privates teach soft skills but publics don’t? In my view soft skills depend more on personality and the values taught at home.l, have less to do with the high school the kid goes to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

+1
All these Feds working in the area are highly educated and smart, yet make no money.
It takes a lot more than education to be wealthy. The wealthy know that.

Lol at “no money”….. you must live in a bubble.

Making 200K a year each is nothing by my standards. Aim higher

DP
I use statistics, similar to what the government does. I think 2 educated working feds are squarely UMC. When one uses stats as cutoffs it doesn't really matter what others "think", because there are defined boundaries.

Perhaps top 1% of net worth for the DC area should be considered. That's over 20 million.

Happy slicing:
https://dqydj.com/income-by-city/
Or
https://dqydj.com/net-worth-percentile-calculator-united-states/

Also many calculators to slice by age, gender, and other demographics.

Upper class is usually defined above 5% or 2.5%, depending on which economist is publishing. Only looking at the top 1% is really myopic. But hey, do what you want and let others do the same. I trust the professionals in this field and normally go with 2.5 or 5 depending on the point I'm trying to make. Top 2.5% in DC is closer to NW of 7M and HHI of 650k.

"Wealthy" is usually defined by top quintile which would include dual Fed households in DC - NW 700k, HHI 225k.

So you can have a very narrowly defined group but it doesn't say anything about the population as a whole. Plus, it's not helpful to hurl insults the way some PPs did - not saying you specifically, but some did. It is helpful to define criteria and categorize appropriately.

At my country club a HHI of 1 to 1.5 million is about average. Same with a 7 to 12 million net worth. I get that may be a bubble. But I like that it pushes me to think bigger and achieve more.

That’s some impressive e-stats! In reality you might be a low level admin that riding the high of having just finished Ayn Rand. We’ll never know, although I think I’m guessing right. Your country club is pushing you to think bigger and achieve more??? I had a good laugh.

Regardless, as lame as it is, you’re just making a tired argument from authority, “I’m right because I’m rich” (or so you claim).

The core or your argument is that going to private school helps because you’re building a network with future rich people that may help you in your career. I’m somewhat doubtful about this, you build most of your network through professional contacts that work in your industry, how many people move their career through their high school classmates? I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, just that it’s not the norm at all.

There are legitimate reasons for sending a child to private (like being a good fit for their interest and personality), but setting them up for being rich in the future is not one of them. It sounds more wishful thinking on your side to be honest.

I agree with your post, but I think this guy is squarely publicly educated, wishes he belongs to a country club, and is writing from his parents basement. Clearly, he doesn't have the self awareness a well educated (public or private) person would have. And I know it's a guy, because I've never met a women so outwardly arrogant and stupid at the same time, even anonymously.

Public school educated, yes
My kids are in private now and fully appreciate the value.
I belong to a country club. One that has many famous people that the DCUM crowd fawn over.
And yes, I’m wealthy.
And, I’m a person of color.
I don’t live in a basement. Redfin lists my house as being worth 3.3 million. Thanks

Amy Ray and Emily Saliers? Which country club? I must know!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And LOL at you all claiming these schools are diverse. They’re as diverse as a box of milk toast with a bag of rice next to it.

Which schools are "these schools"? My kid's MCPS high school, in Ganglandia, is diverse by any measure of diversity, except I guess maybe kids from super-rich families are underrepresented.

The post is literally about W schools. Keep up.

W schools have a lack of diversity. Hence why the Board of Education raises the issue of redrawing boundaries once in a while.

W schools do have students who have a sense of entitlement and break rules without a fear of consequences. There’s a large percentage of students with cash to spend on drugs.

Compared to many other schools in MCPS. Whitman, Wootton, Churchill, and WJ are less diverse than many other schools in MCPS. In the bigger picture, though, there is no school in MCPS that is not diverse. Certainly far more diverse than the public schools I went to, growing up.

Define “diverse.” <5% FARMS isn’t exactly diverse in my book.

There are many aspects of diversity. Household income (poor/not-poor) is one of them. It is not the only one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

+1
All these Feds working in the area are highly educated and smart, yet make no money.
It takes a lot more than education to be wealthy. The wealthy know that.

Lol at “no money”….. you must live in a bubble.

Making 200K a year each is nothing by my standards. Aim higher

DP
I use statistics, similar to what the government does. I think 2 educated working feds are squarely UMC. When one uses stats as cutoffs it doesn't really matter what others "think", because there are defined boundaries.

Perhaps top 1% of net worth for the DC area should be considered. That's over 20 million.

Happy slicing:
https://dqydj.com/income-by-city/
Or
https://dqydj.com/net-worth-percentile-calculator-united-states/

Also many calculators to slice by age, gender, and other demographics.

Upper class is usually defined above 5% or 2.5%, depending on which economist is publishing. Only looking at the top 1% is really myopic. But hey, do what you want and let others do the same. I trust the professionals in this field and normally go with 2.5 or 5 depending on the point I'm trying to make. Top 2.5% in DC is closer to NW of 7M and HHI of 650k.

"Wealthy" is usually defined by top quintile which would include dual Fed households in DC - NW 700k, HHI 225k.

So you can have a very narrowly defined group but it doesn't say anything about the population as a whole. Plus, it's not helpful to hurl insults the way some PPs did - not saying you specifically, but some did. It is helpful to define criteria and categorize appropriately.

At my country club a HHI of 1 to 1.5 million is about average. Same with a 7 to 12 million net worth. I get that may be a bubble. But I like that it pushes me to think bigger and achieve more.

That’s some impressive e-stats! In reality you might be a low level admin that riding the high of having just finished Ayn Rand. We’ll never know, although I think I’m guessing right. Your country club is pushing you to think bigger and achieve more??? I had a good laugh.

Regardless, as lame as it is, you’re just making a tired argument from authority, “I’m right because I’m rich” (or so you claim).

The core or your argument is that going to private school helps because you’re building a network with future rich people that may help you in your career. I’m somewhat doubtful about this, you build most of your network through professional contacts that work in your industry, how many people move their career through their high school classmates? I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, just that it’s not the norm at all.

There are legitimate reasons for sending a child to private (like being a good fit for their interest and personality), but setting them up for being rich in the future is not one of them. It sounds more wishful thinking on your side to be honest.

I agree with your post, but I think this guy is squarely publicly educated, wishes he belongs to a country club, and is writing from his parents basement. Clearly, he doesn't have the self awareness a well educated (public or private) person would have. And I know it's a guy, because I've never met a women so outwardly arrogant and stupid at the same time, even anonymously.

Public school educated, yes
My kids are in private now and fully appreciate the value.
I belong to a country club. One that has many famous people that the DCUM crowd fawn over.
And yes, I’m wealthy.
And, I’m a person of color.
I don’t live in a basement. Redfin lists my house as being worth 3.3 million. Thanks

Amy Ray and Emily Saliers? Which country club? I must know!

Lmao… what a joke. People with actual money don’t brag about it. Is this smpotatoes? Probably.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

+1
All these Feds working in the area are highly educated and smart, yet make no money.
It takes a lot more than education to be wealthy. The wealthy know that.

Lol at “no money”….. you must live in a bubble.

Making 200K a year each is nothing by my standards. Aim higher

DP
I use statistics, similar to what the government does. I think 2 educated working feds are squarely UMC. When one uses stats as cutoffs it doesn't really matter what others "think", because there are defined boundaries.

Perhaps top 1% of net worth for the DC area should be considered. That's over 20 million.

Happy slicing:
https://dqydj.com/income-by-city/
Or
https://dqydj.com/net-worth-percentile-calculator-united-states/

Also many calculators to slice by age, gender, and other demographics.

Upper class is usually defined above 5% or 2.5%, depending on which economist is publishing. Only looking at the top 1% is really myopic. But hey, do what you want and let others do the same. I trust the professionals in this field and normally go with 2.5 or 5 depending on the point I'm trying to make. Top 2.5% in DC is closer to NW of 7M and HHI of 650k.

"Wealthy" is usually defined by top quintile which would include dual Fed households in DC - NW 700k, HHI 225k.

So you can have a very narrowly defined group but it doesn't say anything about the population as a whole. Plus, it's not helpful to hurl insults the way some PPs did - not saying you specifically, but some did. It is helpful to define criteria and categorize appropriately.

At my country club a HHI of 1 to 1.5 million is about average. Same with a 7 to 12 million net worth. I get that may be a bubble. But I like that it pushes me to think bigger and achieve more.

That’s some impressive e-stats! In reality you might be a low level admin that riding the high of having just finished Ayn Rand. We’ll never know, although I think I’m guessing right. Your country club is pushing you to think bigger and achieve more??? I had a good laugh.

Regardless, as lame as it is, you’re just making a tired argument from authority, “I’m right because I’m rich” (or so you claim).

The core or your argument is that going to private school helps because you’re building a network with future rich people that may help you in your career. I’m somewhat doubtful about this, you build most of your network through professional contacts that work in your industry, how many people move their career through their high school classmates? I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, just that it’s not the norm at all.

There are legitimate reasons for sending a child to private (like being a good fit for their interest and personality), but setting them up for being rich in the future is not one of them. It sounds more wishful thinking on your side to be honest.

I agree with your post, but I think this guy is squarely publicly educated, wishes he belongs to a country club, and is writing from his parents basement. Clearly, he doesn't have the self awareness a well educated (public or private) person would have. And I know it's a guy, because I've never met a women so outwardly arrogant and stupid at the same time, even anonymously.

Public school educated, yes
My kids are in private now and fully appreciate the value.
I belong to a country club. One that has many famous people that the DCUM crowd fawn over.
And yes, I’m wealthy.
And, I’m a person of color.
I don’t live in a basement. Redfin lists my house as being worth 3.3 million. Thanks

Amy Ray and Emily Saliers? Which country club? I must know!

Lmao… what a joke. People with actual money don’t brag about it. Is this smpotatoes? Probably.

That's silly, PP. Plenty of people with actual money actually do brag about it. Though I don't think this PP is one of them; I think this PP is writing fanfic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And LOL at you all claiming these schools are diverse. They’re as diverse as a box of milk toast with a bag of rice next to it.

Which schools are "these schools"? My kid's MCPS high school, in Ganglandia, is diverse by any measure of diversity, except I guess maybe kids from super-rich families are underrepresented.

The post is literally about W schools. Keep up.

W schools have a lack of diversity. Hence why the Board of Education raises the issue of redrawing boundaries once in a while.

W schools do have students who have a sense of entitlement and break rules without a fear of consequences. There’s a large percentage of students with cash to spend on drugs.

Compared to many other schools in MCPS. Whitman, Wootton, Churchill, and WJ are less diverse than many other schools in MCPS. In the bigger picture, though, there is no school in MCPS that is not diverse. Certainly far more diverse than the public schools I went to, growing up.

Define “diverse.” <5% FARMS isn’t exactly diverse in my book.

There are many aspects of diversity. Household income (poor/not-poor) is one of them. It is not the only one.

So then tell me how W schools are so diverse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

+1
All these Feds working in the area are highly educated and smart, yet make no money.
It takes a lot more than education to be wealthy. The wealthy know that.

Lol at “no money”….. you must live in a bubble.

Making 200K a year each is nothing by my standards. Aim higher

DP
I use statistics, similar to what the government does. I think 2 educated working feds are squarely UMC. When one uses stats as cutoffs it doesn't really matter what others "think", because there are defined boundaries.

Perhaps top 1% of net worth for the DC area should be considered. That's over 20 million.

Happy slicing:
https://dqydj.com/income-by-city/
Or
https://dqydj.com/net-worth-percentile-calculator-united-states/

Also many calculators to slice by age, gender, and other demographics.

Upper class is usually defined above 5% or 2.5%, depending on which economist is publishing. Only looking at the top 1% is really myopic. But hey, do what you want and let others do the same. I trust the professionals in this field and normally go with 2.5 or 5 depending on the point I'm trying to make. Top 2.5% in DC is closer to NW of 7M and HHI of 650k.

"Wealthy" is usually defined by top quintile which would include dual Fed households in DC - NW 700k, HHI 225k.

So you can have a very narrowly defined group but it doesn't say anything about the population as a whole. Plus, it's not helpful to hurl insults the way some PPs did - not saying you specifically, but some did. It is helpful to define criteria and categorize appropriately.

At my country club a HHI of 1 to 1.5 million is about average. Same with a 7 to 12 million net worth. I get that may be a bubble. But I like that it pushes me to think bigger and achieve more.

That’s some impressive e-stats! In reality you might be a low level admin that riding the high of having just finished Ayn Rand. We’ll never know, although I think I’m guessing right. Your country club is pushing you to think bigger and achieve more??? I had a good laugh.

Regardless, as lame as it is, you’re just making a tired argument from authority, “I’m right because I’m rich” (or so you claim).

The core or your argument is that going to private school helps because you’re building a network with future rich people that may help you in your career. I’m somewhat doubtful about this, you build most of your network through professional contacts that work in your industry, how many people move their career through their high school classmates? I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, just that it’s not the norm at all.

There are legitimate reasons for sending a child to private (like being a good fit for their interest and personality), but setting them up for being rich in the future is not one of them. It sounds more wishful thinking on your side to be honest.

I agree with your post, but I think this guy is squarely publicly educated, wishes he belongs to a country club, and is writing from his parents basement. Clearly, he doesn't have the self awareness a well educated (public or private) person would have. And I know it's a guy, because I've never met a women so outwardly arrogant and stupid at the same time, even anonymously.

Public school educated, yes
My kids are in private now and fully appreciate the value.
I belong to a country club. One that has many famous people that the DCUM crowd fawn over.
And yes, I’m wealthy.
And, I’m a person of color.
I don’t live in a basement. Redfin lists my house as being worth 3.3 million. Thanks

Amy Ray and Emily Saliers? Which country club? I must know!

Lmao… what a joke. People with actual money don’t brag about it. Is this smpotatoes? Probably.

Some do some don’t.

Several of the wealthiest guys I know talk about their wealth and success non-stop…they earned it, god bless them.

[Anonymous]

This thread makes people want to avoid the entire area! Racist and classist. Bashing of Asians/Asian-Americans, bragging about country clubs, bragging about their 3.3 million house, how 200k each for a two-income household is not wealthy. Who are you people?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And LOL at you all claiming these schools are diverse. They’re as diverse as a box of milk toast with a bag of rice next to it.

Which schools are "these schools"? My kid's MCPS high school, in Ganglandia, is diverse by any measure of diversity, except I guess maybe kids from super-rich families are underrepresented.

The post is literally about W schools. Keep up.

W schools have a lack of diversity. Hence why the Board of Education raises the issue of redrawing boundaries once in a while.

W schools do have students who have a sense of entitlement and break rules without a fear of consequences. There’s a large percentage of students with cash to spend on drugs.

Compared to many other schools in MCPS. Whitman, Wootton, Churchill, and WJ are less diverse than many other schools in MCPS. In the bigger picture, though, there is no school in MCPS that is not diverse. Certainly far more diverse than the public schools I went to, growing up.

Define “diverse.” <5% FARMS isn’t exactly diverse in my book.

There are many aspects of diversity. Household income (poor/not-poor) is one of them. It is not the only one.

So then tell me how W schools are so diverse.

Even Whitman, which is the whitest high school in MCPS, is 40% non-white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And LOL at you all claiming these schools are diverse. They’re as diverse as a box of milk toast with a bag of rice next to it.

Which schools are "these schools"? My kid's MCPS high school, in Ganglandia, is diverse by any measure of diversity, except I guess maybe kids from super-rich families are underrepresented.

The post is literally about W schools. Keep up.

W schools have a lack of diversity. Hence why the Board of Education raises the issue of redrawing boundaries once in a while.

W schools do have students who have a sense of entitlement and break rules without a fear of consequences. There’s a large percentage of students with cash to spend on drugs.

Compared to many other schools in MCPS. Whitman, Wootton, Churchill, and WJ are less diverse than many other schools in MCPS. In the bigger picture, though, there is no school in MCPS that is not diverse. Certainly far more diverse than the public schools I went to, growing up.

Define “diverse.” <5% FARMS isn’t exactly diverse in my book.

There are many aspects of diversity. Household income (poor/not-poor) is one of them. It is not the only one.

So then tell me how W schools are so diverse.

Even Whitman, which is the whitest high school in MCPS, is 40% non-white.

And top private schools are typically 40-50% non-white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And LOL at you all claiming these schools are diverse. They’re as diverse as a box of milk toast with a bag of rice next to it.

Which schools are "these schools"? My kid's MCPS high school, in Ganglandia, is diverse by any measure of diversity, except I guess maybe kids from super-rich families are underrepresented.

The post is literally about W schools. Keep up.

W schools have a lack of diversity. Hence why the Board of Education raises the issue of redrawing boundaries once in a while.

W schools do have students who have a sense of entitlement and break rules without a fear of consequences. There’s a large percentage of students with cash to spend on drugs.

Compared to many other schools in MCPS. Whitman, Wootton, Churchill, and WJ are less diverse than many other schools in MCPS. In the bigger picture, though, there is no school in MCPS that is not diverse. Certainly far more diverse than the public schools I went to, growing up.

Define “diverse.” <5% FARMS isn’t exactly diverse in my book.

There are many aspects of diversity. Household income (poor/not-poor) is one of them. It is not the only one.

So then tell me how W schools are so diverse.

Even Whitman, which is the whitest high school in MCPS, is 40% non-white.

And top private schools are typically 40-50% non-white.

"Top private" schools are, by definition, highly selective. Even more selective than real estate prices and rents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And LOL at you all claiming these schools are diverse. They’re as diverse as a box of milk toast with a bag of rice next to it.

Which schools are "these schools"? My kid's MCPS high school, in Ganglandia, is diverse by any measure of diversity, except I guess maybe kids from super-rich families are underrepresented.

The post is literally about W schools. Keep up.

W schools have a lack of diversity. Hence why the Board of Education raises the issue of redrawing boundaries once in a while.

W schools do have students who have a sense of entitlement and break rules without a fear of consequences. There’s a large percentage of students with cash to spend on drugs.

Compared to many other schools in MCPS. Whitman, Wootton, Churchill, and WJ are less diverse than many other schools in MCPS. In the bigger picture, though, there is no school in MCPS that is not diverse. Certainly far more diverse than the public schools I went to, growing up.

Define “diverse.” <5% FARMS isn’t exactly diverse in my book.

There are many aspects of diversity. Household income (poor/not-poor) is one of them. It is not the only one.

So then tell me how W schools are so diverse.

Even Whitman, which is the whitest high school in MCPS, is 40% non-white.

And top private schools are typically 40-50% non-white.

"Top private" schools are, by definition, highly selective. Even more selective than real estate prices and rents.

Love how you’re trying to act as though you didn’t buy into a segregated environment.