Anonymous wrote:I wish public school here do uniform. It is a lot cheaper, and no kids or parents feel any pressure of not dressing right for styles or unnamed brand. That is one less peer pressure.

If they are generic uniforms kids still can wear name brands as often its just colors selected. So, kids can still wear UA polo shirts or Target. I'd buy mine UA just because they'd last longer.

I wish public school here do uniform. It is a lot cheaper, and no kids or parents feel any pressure of not dressing right for styles or unnamed brand. That is one less peer pressure.

Anonymous wrote:Uniform is cheaper as long as they don't require school logos. With logos, a polo shirt goes from 4 to 20.

You also still need at least a week or two worth of casual clothes for the breaks in school.

So, the uniforms are actually more expensive, since I would have to buy them in addition to the clothing I normally buy. Even if the uniform is inexpensive, it is still an additional expense, not a substitution. My children do not currently have a separate school wardrobe.

Uniform is cheaper as long as they don't require school logos. With logos, a polo shirt goes from 4 to 20.

You also still need at least a week or two worth of casual clothes for the breaks in school.

Anonymous wrote:I think it depends on your shopping habits. I buy in advance and sometimes a few sizes up so for me its far cheaper not to do uniforms but if the uniforms were the same year after year I'm assuming I could do the same. I am glad publics don't require uniforms. I don't see the point and I don't think I would save money.

This. I had one kid w/uniform and one without. The kid wo a uniform actually is the one who gets all the hand me downs so I spend very little on him, but I was able to get inexpensive uniforms.

What is nice about uniforms is that it makes the morning so so easy. Just throw out a shirt and pants and you’re done!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What cost more, to outfit a kid for school in the school uniform or
regular clothing? Most people seem to believe that uniforms save
money overall. If so, why public schools don't require uniforms?
Most charters do and they serve the same demographics.

Many band school districts do have uniforms or dress codes. Mine does- Baltimore City. I think it’s cheaper and a whole lot easier for parents. No drama about what to wear every day.

Typo! I meant urban districts.

Anonymous wrote:I’m at a public school with uniforms 4 days a week. I can buy them at Target or Kohl’s or Old Navy. Nothing specialized. If I get them on sale, the polo shirts are $4. Of course, I buy them cheap regular clothes too, but they don’t need as many clothes with uniforms.

Same, but my kids wear uniforms 5 days per week in their public. With the options at Old Navy, Target, etc. and the uniform store/locker run by the school, it is much cheaper for them to wear uniforms.

I’m at a public school with uniforms 4 days a week. I can buy them at Target or Kohl’s or Old Navy. Nothing specialized. If I get them on sale, the polo shirts are $4. Of course, I buy them cheap regular clothes too, but they don’t need as many clothes with uniforms.

My friend’s daughter in catholic school has to buy customized uniforms from a specific supplier and they are way more expensive than it would be to buy street clothes.

Anonymous wrote:What cost more, to outfit a kid for school in the school uniform or
regular clothing? Most people seem to believe that uniforms save
money overall. If so, why public schools don't require uniforms?
Most charters do and they serve the same demographics.

Many band school districts do have uniforms or dress codes. Mine does- Baltimore City. I think it’s cheaper and a whole lot easier for parents. No drama about what to wear every day.

For us uniforms were much more expensive. My son got tons of hand me downs from friends and relatives so we didn't need to buy much clothing. But we had to buy uniforms. And the shirts were white so they got really dirty. I thought I'd be ok with uniforms but I didn't them and my son didn't either.

My child in traditional school wears a uniform my children in Montessori school do not. I spend far less on uniforms. The school has a consignment sale at the beginning of the year. I spent less than $100. But even the years I've purchased from the uniform shop I pay less than I do for regular clothes.

I like uniforms. It makes the day easier. There was a recent vote to add uniforms at the Montessori school and the majority of the parents voted no.

Overall, uniforms are cheaper. I switched to public school school and I definitely spend more on clothes now...but now I don’t pay tuition!

You think that if public school could order boatload of inexpensive t's and long sleeve t's and hoodies
and provide them to the kids at cost would nots save parents a TON?

I think it depends on your shopping habits. I buy in advance and sometimes a few sizes up so for me its far cheaper not to do uniforms but if the uniforms were the same year after year I'm assuming I could do the same. I am glad publics don't require uniforms. I don't see the point and I don't think I would save money.

What cost more, to outfit a kid for school in the school uniform or
regular clothing? Most people seem to believe that uniforms save
money overall. If so, why public schools don't require uniforms?
Most charters do and they serve the same demographics.