A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » misc.kids » General
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Rant: Over indulgent parents strike again



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old January 8th 04, 07:20 PM
Stan McCann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rant: Over indulgent parents strike again

Banty wrote:

So all the OP has to do is say "no deal". Which he did. Now as to what the
actual problem is......????


That was my take on it to. The kid asked for what he wanted. The OP
didn't want to pay that much. End of story. I don't see where the kid
did anything wrong. Why the bitching?

Stan McCann
stan at sure cann dot com or
stan at nmsua dot nmsu dot edu

  #12  
Old January 8th 04, 07:32 PM
Brandon Sommerville
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rant: Over indulgent parents strike again

On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 12:42:30 -0500, Nan wrote:

Probably 17 years ago my mom would have the newspaper boy mow her
lawn. It was a fairly large back yard, but a tiny front yard. We
supplied the mower and the gasoline. She paid him $15.

My son used to shovel sidewalks 10 years ago, and got paid around
$10-$15 per, back then.

Funny how people seem to think $10 is a windfall for something the
going rate is likely much higher for currently.


Everyone remembers what the going rate was when they were young and
they expect it to be the same.
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

Definition of "Lottery":
Millions of stupid people contributing
to make one stupid person look smart.
  #13  
Old January 8th 04, 07:37 PM
Banty
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rant: Over indulgent parents strike again

In article , Nan says...

On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 17:27:41 GMT, dragonlady
wrote:
Not always. Many years ago, I was a much in demand babysitter. I sat
for a new family in the neighborhood without stating a price up front,
and was stunned to get paid about 1/3 of the going rate. When that
neighbor called again, I told her my normal hourly rate (actually, since
she had 6 kids who were, um, challenging, the price I quoted was about
twice my normal hourly rate), and she told me that she would only pay
what she'd paid before, so I turned the job down. She called my mother
to complain that I was a lazy, spoiled teenager who was turning down
legitimate work! Fortunately, Mom knew what was going on, and told her
that I didn't need to work for pitifully low wages -- if she wanted me,
she'd have to pay what I was worth.

I think my cousins got $5 per sidewalk when they were doing it about 40
years ago; they invested in a snow blower, so they could take on more
clients, and did very well. I no longer live where snow happens, but
I'm guessing the "going rate" for shoveling is WELL above $10!


Probably 17 years ago my mom would have the newspaper boy mow her
lawn. It was a fairly large back yard, but a tiny front yard. We
supplied the mower and the gasoline. She paid him $15.

My son used to shovel sidewalks 10 years ago, and got paid around
$10-$15 per, back then.

Funny how people seem to think $10 is a windfall for something the
going rate is likely much higher for currently.

Nan


On the other hand, I used to hire a couple of young babysitters (10 year old
kids who live on my block) to watch my son for an hour or two, provided that
their parents were in the house too, in case of emergencies (this being
understood with the parents). When the father of one found that I paid a 22
year old babysitter, who sometimes does overnights, more than his 10 year old,
he got mad and sent his son for 'the difference'. I sent him back. Dad called.
I told his Dad that, by design of the babysitting job, his boy takes on
considerably less responsibility than the 22 year old - I'm not relying on the
10 year old for responsible action in emergencies; he's not on tap to feed my
son; he doesn't have to get him ready for school. So, that was the end of his
son babysitting. IOW, "no deal".

Banty

  #14  
Old January 8th 04, 07:57 PM
Marijke
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rant: Over indulgent parents strike again


"Jon Walters" wrote in message
...
Paul wrote:
Paul


First of all -- the kids of this generation are spoiled
and "do no wrong" in the eyes of their parents. They are
right and you are wrong ....


Really? Then you must live among some pretty horrible families. The teens
*I* know are very respectful, shovel driveways for their neighbours for
10.00 (which, in Canadian dollars is less than your 10.00) or for free. We
insisted that our son shovel our elderly neighbour's drive for free (and he
would have) but the neighbour insisted on paying him. So he does, regardless
of how heavy or deep the snow. The kids I know go to school, earn generally
good grades, do volunteer work and are generally a very pleasant bunch to be
around.


especially when a 13 year old
wanted $40 to shovel the snow from my sidewalk recently. I
told the kid I'll give him $10 and he walked away. Good. I'll
wait until it melts before I pay that much.


And that's a problem? He offered you a price. You didn't like it. What's
that got to do with spoiled? You both had the option of agreeing to the
deal. You didn't like his price, he didn't like yours. Doesn't business work
like that?



Marijke, in Montreal
who knows many more "good" teens than "bad" ones.


  #16  
Old January 8th 04, 08:47 PM
Cathy Kearns
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rant: Over indulgent parents strike again


"Banty" wrote in message
...
On the other hand, I used to hire a couple of young babysitters (10 year

old
kids who live on my block) to watch my son for an hour or two, provided

that
their parents were in the house too, in case of emergencies (this being
understood with the parents).


So how much do you pay their parents to be "on call"?

When the father of one found that I paid a 22
year old babysitter, who sometimes does overnights, more than his 10 year

old,
he got mad and sent his son for 'the difference'. I sent him back. Dad

called.
I told his Dad that, by design of the babysitting job, his boy takes on
considerably less responsibility than the 22 year old - I'm not relying on

the
10 year old for responsible action in emergencies;


It sounds like you are relying on his parents to be responsible for action
in
emergencies.

he's not on tap to feed my
son; he doesn't have to get him ready for school. So, that was the end

of his
son babysitting. IOW, "no deal".


I offered to be backup when my daughter was younger and was babysitting
friends. However, I would have also been willing to babysit the kids at my
house for free instead. Sure, grown-ups get paid more, but in the case
of the 10 year olds, you did hire grown-ups. If I were you I would look
hard at the responsibility thing. If you are paying less because they
aren't
feeding him, dressing him, or driving him places that's one thing. If you
aren't paying the babysitter as much because they have to depend on their
own parents to backup, then you should also be paying the back up. If
you are paying less because they are watching the kids while you are
busy, but on the premises then that sounds legit.


Banty



  #17  
Old January 8th 04, 09:08 PM
Brandon Sommerville
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rant: Over indulgent parents strike again

On 8 Jan 2004 10:37:49 -0800, Banty wrote:

On the other hand, I used to hire a couple of young babysitters (10 year old
kids who live on my block) to watch my son for an hour or two, provided that
their parents were in the house too, in case of emergencies (this being
understood with the parents). When the father of one found that I paid a 22
year old babysitter, who sometimes does overnights, more than his 10 year old,
he got mad and sent his son for 'the difference'. I sent him back. Dad called.
I told his Dad that, by design of the babysitting job, his boy takes on
considerably less responsibility than the 22 year old - I'm not relying on the
10 year old for responsible action in emergencies; he's not on tap to feed my
son; he doesn't have to get him ready for school. So, that was the end of his
son babysitting. IOW, "no deal".


It sounds like you are relying on the 10 yr old to get their parents
in an emergency, which would be pretty responsible. The dad didn't
have any right to request more money for past work as it was paid at
the negotiated rate, but he did have the right (and probably the
obligation) to ask that the future rate be the rate of the 22 yr old
since that was what you were willing to pay for hourly services of
equivalent responsibility (safety of your child and all).

Essentially the parents are responsible for your child and simply
delegating the actual watching to their children.
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

Definition of "Lottery":
Millions of stupid people contributing
to make one stupid person look smart.
  #18  
Old January 8th 04, 09:37 PM
Brent P
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rant: Over indulgent parents strike again

In article , Cathy Weeks wrote:

minimum of driveway and a path to the door (only about 5 feet of
path). This is actually a very small area (our front door is RIGHT by
our driveway, and our house is VERY close to the road). The job took
hours (4 or so). If I could have paid someone $25 per hour I would
have HAPPILY paid the $100 (or perhaps more). I was stiff and sore
for days after that job.


As I have learned in chicago blizzards is to go out in the snow as
it's falling and shovel low depths often. The last one we had in 99 (I
think) I went out and shoveled every couple-three hours. Annoying yes,
but I didn't have my cars burried like the neighbors did. It's just
easier to take care of it in small bites.


  #19  
Old January 8th 04, 10:34 PM
P. Tierney
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rant: Over indulgent parents strike again


"Jon Walters" wrote:

First of all -- the kids of this generation are spoiled
and "do no wrong" in the eyes of their parents.


Second of all, that's a baseless generalization. Oh, there
are a few examples. But that's supposed to apply to the
hundred million or so in the generation?

They are
right and you are wrong .... especially when a 13 year old
wanted $40 to shovel the snow from my sidewalk recently. I
told the kid I'll give him $10 and he walked away.


As opposed to... what? Going along with whatever
it is that you say? Why on earth should *anyone* do that?

About 7-8 teens (12-15) received these motor cycles/scooters
this Christmas and they ride (speed) up and down the street
and don't even use helmets! The law here requires helmets
for bicycles so you'd think the parents would demand they
wear them .... but they (kids) always get "their way" but
this will change when one of them is seriously hurt! They even
ride through this neighborhood at night with no lights attached
to their motor cycles. Where are the parents?


Beats me. Your the one who lives in that neighborhood.
You figure it out.


P. Tierney


  #20  
Old January 8th 04, 11:25 PM
Paul
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rant: Over indulgent parents strike again


"Jon Walters" wrote in message
...

First of all -- the kids of this generation are spoiled
and "do no wrong" in the eyes of their parents. They are
right and you are wrong .... especially when a 13 year old
wanted $40 to shovel the snow from my sidewalk recently. I
told the kid I'll give him $10 and he walked away. Good. I'll
wait until it melts before I pay that much.


I'm not going to get too deep in to this part of the discussion being as I
live in a area where if it does snow, you don't bother shoveling the drive
way as you will have to wait untill the snow melts in the street anyway, but
the fact that he walked away from the job you offered means that he
apparently had other jobs lined up and/or regular clients who are willing to
pay his rate. If business were slow or he had competition, he would have
taken your offer.

About 7-8 teens (12-15) received these motor cycles/scooters
this Christmas and they ride (speed) up and down the street
and don't even use helmets! The law here requires helmets
for bicycles so you'd think the parents would demand they
wear them .... but they (kids) always get "their way" but
this will change when one of them is seriously hurt! They even
ride through this neighborhood at night with no lights attached
to their motor cycles. Where are the parents?


I don't know where their parents are, but if one of these kids strikes my
vehicle while illegally and recklessly operating one of these scooters, they
can bet their a*s that their parents will get a huge car repair bill from
me - attached to a lawsuit if necessary. Also, many of the kids I am
referring to from my original post appear to be quite a bit younger than 12
years of age - from the news article the first kid mentioned was a 10 YO,
the second one was 9 YO. Both of whom disregarded the traffic laws and got a
3000 lb lesson in the laws of physics.

BTW, misc.kids and rec.motorcycles ?? Where did these come from??

--
Paul
==HOMICIDE!! SLOWER TRAFFIC THIS
SIDE==


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
| | Kids should work... Kane General 13 December 10th 03 03:30 AM
WSJ: How to Give Your Child A Longer Life Jean B. General 0 December 9th 03 07:10 PM
Kids should work. LaVonne Carlson General 22 December 7th 03 05:27 AM
Mom goes AWOL from Iraq - says children need her at home John Stone General 179 November 19th 03 12:08 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.