Didn't read all the comments here, but it seems flawed to think that one must attend one of 15-20 elite colleges to be successful. Read the Millionaire Next Door - a great study of who millionaires in America actually are and how they got there. And it has virtually nothing to do with specific educational pedigree, although education in general is important.

What do you guys consider MC/UMC salaries to be?

Anonymous wrote:^^^But this thread turned into a "bashing the rich" thread because, well..people just love bashing those who have more and looking for a way to make themselves feel better about having less than someone else.

I disagree. I am affluent, participated in this discussion, and found the information informative.

Anonymous wrote:^^^But this thread turned into a "bashing the rich" thread because, well..people just love bashing those who have more and looking for a way to make themselves feel better about having less than someone else.

Given that many of the commenters on here who find the article relatable are affluent, I think dismissing this thread as "bashing the rich" is a bit much. But whatever helps you sleep at night.

^^^But this thread turned into a "bashing the rich" thread because, well..people just love bashing those who have more and looking for a way to make themselves feel better about having less than someone else.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know you are talking to multiple people, right? I am the PP who is saying you should think critically rather than taking an article as gospel truth. I haven't said anything about the discussion here. There are multiple people who disagree with OPs interpretation.

I am still confused as to why it's so scary to suggest that you not assume everything an author writes is inviolate.

I don't think people assume that *all* affluent parents are like this. But, I think there is more of this type of pressure in affluent families, and so this article should just be a warning to check yourselves. There have been, and probably will continue to be, seemingly have-it-all, high achieving children from affluent families that commit suicide due to pressure, either from parents, peers, or themselves.

Yup and poor kids with disinterested parents feel hopelessness and dispair and kill themselves, too. Perhaps those parents need to "check themselves." If course, those deaths don't get as much media play...

I don't think this is stupid, at all. The entire premise of the thread is that rich people screw up their kids by having high expectations. It seems entirely reasonable to demonstrate the flip side of the story.

One of the main points of the article is that the well-being of teenagers vis-a-vis their family income is a u-shaped curve, with the children of the very wealthy struggling just as the children of the very poor are. It is absolutely accepted as gospel that children living in poverty are at-risk. The author of this article is making the argument that the children of the very wealthy are at-risk, too. For different reasons, perhaps, but still at-risk.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know you are talking to multiple people, right? I am the PP who is saying you should think critically rather than taking an article as gospel truth. I haven't said anything about the discussion here. There are multiple people who disagree with OPs interpretation.

I am still confused as to why it's so scary to suggest that you not assume everything an author writes is inviolate.

I don't think people assume that *all* affluent parents are like this. But, I think there is more of this type of pressure in affluent families, and so this article should just be a warning to check yourselves. There have been, and probably will continue to be, seemingly have-it-all, high achieving children from affluent families that commit suicide due to pressure, either from parents, peers, or themselves.

Yup and poor kids with disinterested parents feel hopelessness and dispair and kill themselves, too. Perhaps those parents need to "check themselves." If course, those deaths don't get as much media play...

I don't think this is stupid, at all. The entire premise of the thread is that rich people screw up their kids by having high expectations. It seems entirely reasonable to demonstrate the flip side of the story.

I suppose that could be a subject for another story. But my guess is it wouldn't strike nearly the chord this story has with DCUM parents, which tells you something.

Yes, it does. Those who have not, enjoy bashing those that do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know you are talking to multiple people, right? I am the PP who is saying you should think critically rather than taking an article as gospel truth. I haven't said anything about the discussion here. There are multiple people who disagree with OPs interpretation.

I am still confused as to why it's so scary to suggest that you not assume everything an author writes is inviolate.

I don't think people assume that *all* affluent parents are like this. But, I think there is more of this type of pressure in affluent families, and so this article should just be a warning to check yourselves. There have been, and probably will continue to be, seemingly have-it-all, high achieving children from affluent families that commit suicide due to pressure, either from parents, peers, or themselves.

Yup and poor kids with disinterested parents feel hopelessness and dispair and kill themselves, too. Perhaps those parents need to "check themselves." If course, those deaths don't get as much media play...

I don't think this is stupid, at all. The entire premise of the thread is that rich people screw up their kids by having high expectations. It seems entirely reasonable to demonstrate the flip side of the story.

I suppose that could be a subject for another story. But my guess is it wouldn't strike nearly the chord this story has with DCUM parents, which tells you something.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know you are talking to multiple people, right? I am the PP who is saying you should think critically rather than taking an article as gospel truth. I haven't said anything about the discussion here. There are multiple people who disagree with OPs interpretation.

I am still confused as to why it's so scary to suggest that you not assume everything an author writes is inviolate.

I don't think people assume that *all* affluent parents are like this. But, I think there is more of this type of pressure in affluent families, and so this article should just be a warning to check yourselves. There have been, and probably will continue to be, seemingly have-it-all, high achieving children from affluent families that commit suicide due to pressure, either from parents, peers, or themselves.

Yup and poor kids with disinterested parents feel hopelessness and dispair and kill themselves, too. Perhaps those parents need to "check themselves." If course, those deaths don't get as much media play...

I don't think this is stupid, at all. The entire premise of the thread is that rich people screw up their kids by having high expectations. It seems entirely reasonable to demonstrate the flip side of the story.

Anonymous wrote:Does the PP questioning Hanna Rosin's credibility remember that she's the person who poked holes in the UVa rape story?

Yes, of course. That work gives her a free pass from critical analysis because....?