Anonymous wrote:10:18 Right if it was disclosed on the FA application it proves the system is wacked. If you think FA should subsidize luxury liviing, that's your beeswax. Have you read what folks at schools say about families like this? I don't know who lies -- if anyone. All I know is what I see. If you condone lying on FA applications, and argue that it's worth the risk because some aid goes to those who truly need it, that's your beeswax, too.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
I'm not judging based on outward appearances; I'm judging based on what people say -- the assumptions they make about the world, about right and wrong, etc. What has astounded me about this thread is the defenses/defensiveness of so many posters. The sense of entitlement is stunning, as is the cluelessness about the much less forgiving economic constraints that govern other peoples' lives.
Well, what's stunning to me from your post is the arrogance in your mistaken sense of omniscience.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Your perspective is "everybody cheats," so no one is in any position to object. Yes, I call that perspective self-serving and corrupt. And, no, you aren't right -- some people don't cheat.
I'm not judging based on outward appearances; I'm judging based on what people say -- the assumptions they make about the world, about right and wrong, etc. What has astounded me about this thread is the defenses/defensiveness of so many posters. The sense of entitlement is stunning, as is the cluelessness about the much less forgiving economic constraints that govern other peoples' lives.
No, I did not say and do not think that everyone cheats. Read my post, please. I said that it may appear to others that someone cheats even if that person does not cheat, for judgments based on outward appearances can be wrong. I feel that I do not cheat, and I hate to think that there are those receiving FA who cheat the system, but I know such cheaters exist. I am just saying that the posters who are judging others to be FA cheaters based on outward appearances may be dead wrong. You can't judge just by the $1 million house.
I reread your post. At worst, I've attributed to you sentiments that you presumably did not author but which you did quote and explicitly endorse. Your post (9:10b) said nothing about judging based on appearances -- it argued that "everyone" should look in the mirror because those condemning cheating probably cheat themselves.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Your perspective is "everybody cheats," so no one is in any position to object. Yes, I call that perspective self-serving and corrupt. And, no, you aren't right -- some people don't cheat.
I'm not judging based on outward appearances; I'm judging based on what people say -- the assumptions they make about the world, about right and wrong, etc. What has astounded me about this thread is the defenses/defensiveness of so many posters. The sense of entitlement is stunning, as is the cluelessness about the much less forgiving economic constraints that govern other peoples' lives.
No, I did not say and do not think that everyone cheats. Read my post, please. I said that it may appear to others that someone cheats even if that person does not cheat, for judgments based on outward appearances can be wrong. I feel that I do not cheat, and I hate to think that there are those receiving FA who cheat the system, but I know such cheaters exist. I am just saying that the posters who are judging others to be FA cheaters based on outward appearances may be dead wrong. You can't judge just by the $1 million house.
Anonymous wrote:9:46 But if the Mercedes is a rental, it costs double what another rental costs. If it was a gift, sell it and buy a less expensive car. Really. Why should you and I subsidize conspicuous consumption and living the good live because of FA?
Anonymous wrote:
I'm not judging based on outward appearances; I'm judging based on what people say -- the assumptions they make about the world, about right and wrong, etc. What has astounded me about this thread is the defenses/defensiveness of so many posters. The sense of entitlement is stunning, as is the cluelessness about the much less forgiving economic constraints that govern other peoples' lives.
Anonymous wrote:Your perspective is "everybody cheats," so no one is in any position to object. Yes, I call that perspective self-serving and corrupt. And, no, you aren't right -- some people don't cheat.
I'm not judging based on outward appearances; I'm judging based on what people say -- the assumptions they make about the world, about right and wrong, etc. What has astounded me about this thread is the defenses/defensiveness of so many posters. The sense of entitlement is stunning, as is the cluelessness about the much less forgiving economic constraints that govern other peoples' lives.
Anonymous wrote:Gotta love the "you're all just as self-serving and corrupt as I am" approach. Hard as it may be for you to believe, there are actually hard-working, honest people who contribute more and demand less than you and the people you apparently identify with do.
Anonymous wrote:The most dangerous thing about this kind of speculation and gossip about FA recipients is the effect that parents' attitudes can have on their children. Are parents aware that their prejudiced views and attitudes can ride on the backs of their children into the school and poison the community there? There are parents at my son's private school who openly and contemptuously refer to an FA recipient as a "scholarship kid" and imply that such a student is less entitled than a full-paying student. When their children hear such remarks, of course it changes how they think about their classmates that receive FA.
Come on, parents, model the caring for and tolerance of others that you would have your own children exhibit.