Teens have a lot of money. Many work, thus putting money in their pockets. And they don't actually have to support themselves, pay bills, buy groceries, etc.
So they have a pretty big "spending potential" as marketers put it.
Personally, I don't get allowance and I could easily afford an iPhone with my own personal money (not my parents) if I wanted one -- not because I'm a spoiled brat -- I just work and save my money.
Right on, IC. I mean, jeez. What most people who think "spoiled teens" should consider, is that teens by-and-large don't really have OTHER bills (like rent, health insurance, etc). They make money, they can spend it however they like. The reason this burns me is that it makes me think a bunch of adults out there are clueless about what their teens could be making money on to help the household, or give themselves their own allowance. I NEVER got an allowance as a kid. I certainly had my own money though.
Last year at my family reunion, at least one teenage relative had a Blackberry and showed me our family website on his phone. Slight wakeup call for me. I'm often finding myself at a loss for how many ways teens can make REAL money.
Are most adults today out their "SPOILING" their kids? I'm thinking this might be mostly the problem of the people that accuse kids of being spoiled in the first place. Everyone else knows the facts of life a bit better.
Can a teenager really USE a high function phone? How much is the calling and dataplan? I think those are the most important questions.
Yup! Goes to show you that some people don't know the old phrases. It wasn't a sarcastic remark, of course, just a play on words.
"Hook, line, and sinker", USED to be a well understood phrase of our colloquial part of the language over here, though I can't speak for where you are.
well it was sarcasm that started it (on the other thread) i believe humour (and its lack/lack of understanding) was where it was heading (too lazy to check )
but yeah, i thought hook(er) line and sinker was a well worn phrase!
Yup! Goes to show you that some people don't know the old phrases. It wasn't a sarcastic remark, of course, just a play on words.
"Hook, line, and sinker", USED to be a well understood phrase of our colloquial part of the language over here, though I can't speak for where you are.
The phrase dates backs to 1838. I'm guessing that it's an Americanism, but have no evidence to back up that claim.
Will it remain that way as nearly every industrialized nation in the world beats our (US) students in reading, writing, and arithmetic.
Why does everyone pick those subjects to compete with? Oh, that's right, they're all too scared to compete against us in cell phone texting, TV marathon, and all-you-can-eat competitions.
Skipping past the iPhone statistics, did anyone else notice how self-limiting the rest of the survey was? It seems apparent that respondents couldn't put themselves into multiple categories for many of the answers. Take downloading music; either you do it legally or illegally apparently (no gray areas). You can see the problem with this when you look at the percentage that said they downloaded music online: 83%. But when asked where they got their music from, only 70% said they downloaded online (63% illegally, 7% legally). Where did the other 13% disappear to?
Meaningless statistics...ask the right questions and you can get whatever answer you want.
I'll be one of those 18 year olds to proudly own one on launch... An awesome present for graduation at the end of May. (My cell service with verizon is up with at the end of May anyway.. couldn't have been more convenient timing. My dad actually suggested the iPhone as a present. I couldn't say no ! )
This is what's keeping Verizon Wireless, Sprint, Alltel, etc., execs up at night.
I don't think it's hyperbole at all to say that the iPhone and Apple TV over the next five years could could cause major upheaval in the mobile phone and cable/satellite markets.
It will unless principals are allowed to fire teachers who don't do their job or abuse the kids in their class.
<sigh> Off topic, but...
This comment is so ignorant it would be offensive if it weren't so pervasive.
Principals are allowed to fire teachers who abuse children, anywhere and everywhere.
Principals are allowed to fire teachers who don't do their jobs, even in states where teachers are lucky enough to be represented by a union. The most protection that a teachers' union will give to a teacher is to have the decision to terminate a teacher go through due process and be arbitrated. This means that evidence will have to be supplied and the decision will have to be agreed to by more than one person. in the case of union representation, these are things that have been agreed to in a legal agreement between two parties. If you advocate for the "right" of principals to fire teachers without going through due process, you are arguing for the right of one party (but not the other) of an agreement to break a legal contract.
Frankly, I would hope that everyone would have the right to defend him or herself and his or her job if accused by a manager/boss of not performing well. Or is arbitrary firing by a biased and uninformed supervisor something you support? If a teacher is genuinely incompetent, then the teacher will be fired. Happens all the time. If a principal complains that the process is just too hard, then that principal should be fired for not having what it takes to run a school.
Getting rid of due process or union representation for teachers will do nothing to solve the education crisis in America. (And there's a big argument to be made that it will make things much much worse.) Example #1: I went to a Catholic school in Connecticut. No unoin representation for teachers. Most were paid abysmally (we're talking less than 2/3 what public school teachers were paid), but the long timers and dept chairs (chosen by the principal) were paid much better. Although it had some talented teachers, the school was rife with piss-poor ones. In my honors Bio class, we literally spent more time discussing how the Genesis account wasn't necessarily contradicted by evolution, than evolution or genetics itself. (For obvious reasons, the school didn't offer AP Bio.) I quit doing work in my AP Lit class when I took an opportunity to rifle through my teacher's desk and found his copy of Cliffs Notes for Moby Dick. My AP US History teacher, a personal friend of the principal and the bishop and chair of the Social Studies dept, was the worst of the lot. She literally stopped teaching in November (she said we were disrespectful...which we were, for obvious reasons), and that class (an AP class) became another study hall. The head of the religion dept, Fr. Bob, was a disgusting pedophile who would seat the attractive girls in the front row, and routinely drop things on the floor and blatantly look up girls' skirts. (He was next in line for principal, and aiming to be a bishop, until without notice he was reassigned to a different diocese; guess why...) When I was a freshman, there was a group of four or five really good teachers that my older brother really liked. Freethinkers. Very intelligent. Very good teachers. By the time I was a senior, all but one had been fired or pressured heavily to quit. The next year, he was gone too.
Example #2: My own school here in Atlanta. No teachers' union. Last year, because of "budget constraints" (in addition to state cuts, the conservative president of the school board's main plank is to reduce the millage rate--why that qualifies someone to be the head of a school board is beyond me), the county did away with a popular program for low-income and low-performing students. It dealt with basic reading and writing and math skills and job training. The class sometimes functioned as a study hall (something the county did away with years before I started teaching...but which I remember really helped me get everything done that I needed to). But more importantly, this teacher worked with these kids on an individual basis. He was very dedicated. He dealt with kids that no one else wanted to deal with (kids who could have benefitted from Special Ed programs, but didn't meet the qualifications): kids with anger management issues; gang problems; absent parents; abusive parents; the works. He put up with kids, parents, other teachers (who often blamed him when his students disrupted other classes), and administrators (who blamed him for having lower pass-rates than other teachers...duh...). He had been doing this for 29 years (one year before qualifying for full retirement benefits). Last spring, when he went down to sign what should have been his last contract, he couldn't find it. When he tracked down the principal, she told him that there wasn't a contract for him, thanked him for his service, and walked away. Additionally, there is also at our school a teacher who is in fact notoriously bad. He teaches political science. He's memorized the textbook, so his students do passably well on the state mandated standardized test. But he does very little else other than play powerpoints (that he got from another teacher) and videos, and hand out worksheets. He is also intolerant or questions, a notoriously strict disciplinarian (like making kids stand with their noses against the wall...the honors and AP kids who take his class are usually the only ones who do this; the others tend to get written up for "refusing to comply with a reasonable request"), and just misinformed (he still maintains that the Statue of Liberty is in Washington DC, and has taken to refering to Arabs--and anyone from the middle east--as "Arabics"). But he hasn't been fired, despite no legal constraints on our principal. (He does happen to coach the football team...hmmmmmm...)
So, how does your well-thought-out solution help my school?
Next thing to think about: if a software corporation has trouble producing a good product, and it is discovered that its employees have extremely low morale, extremely high turnover, work in pretty dismal conditions, have a whole host of duties unrelated to their fields of expertise (which take up as much if not more time than their actual programming work), work 10-20% more hours per year than typical American employees (but squeeze it all into 38 weeks, instead of 50), and are paid much less than similarly qualified people in other fields, what might this corporation consider doing?
if a software corporation has trouble producing a good product, and it is discovered that its employees have extremely low morale, extremely high turnover, work in pretty dismal conditions, have a whole host of duties unrelated to their fields of expertise (which take up as much if not more time than their actual programming work), work 10-20% more hours per year than typical American employees (but squeeze it all into 38 weeks, instead of 50), and are paid much less than similarly qualified people in other fields, what might this corporation consider doing?
Spoiled high school teens say they'll whine until their parents plunk down $500 for iPhone
Why do teens think they need cellular phones? Why do their parents agree? For that matter, why do most adults think they need to be -- or want to be -- that in-touch? They're waiting for a call from the President? Obviously, independent, accountable thought is a thing of the past....
Why do teens think they need cellular phones? Why do their parents agree?
I've heard of numerous situations where it's actually good for a teen to have a phone, but I see absolutely no reason for a teenager to have an iPhone. Aside from the fact that most teens will still only use the texting and calling features -- maybe some of the Web to update their blogs or MySpace pages -- a teenager is not going to take care of the device. How many teens drop, sit on, toss, or otherwise abuse their phones on a regular basis? LOTS. I guarantee you that the average life span of an iPhone's screen in the hands (or back pocket) of a teenager will be one week.
Unlike the iPod, the iPhone also requires a 2 year subscription with AT&T. The logistics of the required service and contract make it harder for the iPhone to become ubiquitous among the younger generation.
If I were to be a parent, I'd buy an iPhone for my beloved son/daughter if they accept my 2 year subscription service plan of mowing my lawn, ironing my clothes and washing my car
Of course I'd give them free hugs from time to time.
You know rich people who cannot read, write, or add? I seriously doubt they will stay rich for long. How would you know your accountant, lawyer, or business partner isn't ripping you off?
I won't say they display all of those deficiencies in combination, but yes, it's true. Intellectuals like to think they represent the highest strata of society, but it's just not so. If one is adept at working with and manipulating people to build and exploit a business, that is what leads to monetary success. I know of more stories of wealthy individuals who ignored their limitations and pounced upon whatever opportunities they could create, than stories of intellectually gifted individuals in the same position... but then again, that might just be the crowd I roll with.
Comments
Now all you need is a president with a brain.
He's just insane.
As we dont have 2 year contracts over here (18 month is the longest) the price of the phone will be bumped up to accomadate a 12 month contract.
Ill still pay it though lol
Dear Adults,
Teens have a lot of money. Many work, thus putting money in their pockets. And they don't actually have to support themselves, pay bills, buy groceries, etc.
So they have a pretty big "spending potential" as marketers put it.
Personally, I don't get allowance and I could easily afford an iPhone with my own personal money (not my parents) if I wanted one -- not because I'm a spoiled brat -- I just work and save my money.
Right on, IC. I mean, jeez. What most people who think "spoiled teens" should consider, is that teens by-and-large don't really have OTHER bills (like rent, health insurance, etc). They make money, they can spend it however they like. The reason this burns me is that it makes me think a bunch of adults out there are clueless about what their teens could be making money on to help the household, or give themselves their own allowance. I NEVER got an allowance as a kid. I certainly had my own money though.
Last year at my family reunion, at least one teenage relative had a Blackberry and showed me our family website on his phone. Slight wakeup call for me. I'm often finding myself at a loss for how many ways teens can make REAL money.
Are most adults today out their "SPOILING" their kids? I'm thinking this might be mostly the problem of the people that accuse kids of being spoiled in the first place. Everyone else knows the facts of life a bit better.
Can a teenager really USE a high function phone? How much is the calling and dataplan? I think those are the most important questions.
http://www.google.com/search?q=jobs+for+teens
Yup! Goes to show you that some people don't know the old phrases. It wasn't a sarcastic remark, of course, just a play on words.
"Hook, line, and sinker", USED to be a well understood phrase of our colloquial part of the language over here, though I can't speak for where you are.
well it was sarcasm that started it (on the other thread) i believe humour (and its lack/lack of understanding) was where it was heading (too lazy to check
but yeah, i thought hook(er) line and sinker was a well worn phrase!
unless.... we're showing our age!!!
Yup! Goes to show you that some people don't know the old phrases. It wasn't a sarcastic remark, of course, just a play on words.
"Hook, line, and sinker", USED to be a well understood phrase of our colloquial part of the language over here, though I can't speak for where you are.
The phrase dates backs to 1838. I'm guessing that it's an Americanism, but have no evidence to back up that claim.
Will it remain that way as nearly every industrialized nation in the world beats our (US) students in reading, writing, and arithmetic.
Why does everyone pick those subjects to compete with? Oh, that's right, they're all too scared to compete against us in cell phone texting, TV marathon, and all-you-can-eat competitions.
Will it remain that way as nearly every industrialized nation in the world beats our (US) students in reading, writing, and arithmetic.
It will unless principals are allowed to fire teachers who don't do their job or abuse the kids in their class.
Meaningless statistics...ask the right questions and you can get whatever answer you want.
I'll be one of those 18 year olds to proudly own one on launch... An awesome present for graduation at the end of May. (My cell service with verizon is up with at the end of May anyway.. couldn't have been more convenient timing. My dad actually suggested the iPhone as a present. I couldn't say no
This is what's keeping Verizon Wireless, Sprint, Alltel, etc., execs up at night.
I don't think it's hyperbole at all to say that the iPhone and Apple TV over the next five years could could cause major upheaval in the mobile phone and cable/satellite markets.
It will unless principles are allowed to fire teachers who don't do their job or abuse the kids in their class.
Or for not teaching kids the difference between principle and principal.
Or for not teaching kids the difference between principle and principal.
Ok, I can't believe I did that
wouldn't buying into a contract significantly lower the price of the phone?
The price is already subsidized for the contract. Buying it without a contract (which you can't) would increase the price by a few hundred dollars.
It will unless principals are allowed to fire teachers who don't do their job or abuse the kids in their class.
<sigh> Off topic, but...
This comment is so ignorant it would be offensive if it weren't so pervasive.
Principals are allowed to fire teachers who abuse children, anywhere and everywhere.
Principals are allowed to fire teachers who don't do their jobs, even in states where teachers are lucky enough to be represented by a union. The most protection that a teachers' union will give to a teacher is to have the decision to terminate a teacher go through due process and be arbitrated. This means that evidence will have to be supplied and the decision will have to be agreed to by more than one person. in the case of union representation, these are things that have been agreed to in a legal agreement between two parties. If you advocate for the "right" of principals to fire teachers without going through due process, you are arguing for the right of one party (but not the other) of an agreement to break a legal contract.
Frankly, I would hope that everyone would have the right to defend him or herself and his or her job if accused by a manager/boss of not performing well. Or is arbitrary firing by a biased and uninformed supervisor something you support? If a teacher is genuinely incompetent, then the teacher will be fired. Happens all the time. If a principal complains that the process is just too hard, then that principal should be fired for not having what it takes to run a school.
Getting rid of due process or union representation for teachers will do nothing to solve the education crisis in America. (And there's a big argument to be made that it will make things much much worse.) Example #1: I went to a Catholic school in Connecticut. No unoin representation for teachers. Most were paid abysmally (we're talking less than 2/3 what public school teachers were paid), but the long timers and dept chairs (chosen by the principal) were paid much better. Although it had some talented teachers, the school was rife with piss-poor ones. In my honors Bio class, we literally spent more time discussing how the Genesis account wasn't necessarily contradicted by evolution, than evolution or genetics itself. (For obvious reasons, the school didn't offer AP Bio.) I quit doing work in my AP Lit class when I took an opportunity to rifle through my teacher's desk and found his copy of Cliffs Notes for Moby Dick. My AP US History teacher, a personal friend of the principal and the bishop and chair of the Social Studies dept, was the worst of the lot. She literally stopped teaching in November (she said we were disrespectful...which we were, for obvious reasons), and that class (an AP class) became another study hall. The head of the religion dept, Fr. Bob, was a disgusting pedophile who would seat the attractive girls in the front row, and routinely drop things on the floor and blatantly look up girls' skirts. (He was next in line for principal, and aiming to be a bishop, until without notice he was reassigned to a different diocese; guess why...) When I was a freshman, there was a group of four or five really good teachers that my older brother really liked. Freethinkers. Very intelligent. Very good teachers. By the time I was a senior, all but one had been fired or pressured heavily to quit. The next year, he was gone too.
Example #2: My own school here in Atlanta. No teachers' union. Last year, because of "budget constraints" (in addition to state cuts, the conservative president of the school board's main plank is to reduce the millage rate--why that qualifies someone to be the head of a school board is beyond me), the county did away with a popular program for low-income and low-performing students. It dealt with basic reading and writing and math skills and job training. The class sometimes functioned as a study hall (something the county did away with years before I started teaching...but which I remember really helped me get everything done that I needed to). But more importantly, this teacher worked with these kids on an individual basis. He was very dedicated. He dealt with kids that no one else wanted to deal with (kids who could have benefitted from Special Ed programs, but didn't meet the qualifications): kids with anger management issues; gang problems; absent parents; abusive parents; the works. He put up with kids, parents, other teachers (who often blamed him when his students disrupted other classes), and administrators (who blamed him for having lower pass-rates than other teachers...duh...). He had been doing this for 29 years (one year before qualifying for full retirement benefits). Last spring, when he went down to sign what should have been his last contract, he couldn't find it. When he tracked down the principal, she told him that there wasn't a contract for him, thanked him for his service, and walked away. Additionally, there is also at our school a teacher who is in fact notoriously bad. He teaches political science. He's memorized the textbook, so his students do passably well on the state mandated standardized test. But he does very little else other than play powerpoints (that he got from another teacher) and videos, and hand out worksheets. He is also intolerant or questions, a notoriously strict disciplinarian (like making kids stand with their noses against the wall...the honors and AP kids who take his class are usually the only ones who do this; the others tend to get written up for "refusing to comply with a reasonable request"), and just misinformed (he still maintains that the Statue of Liberty is in Washington DC, and has taken to refering to Arabs--and anyone from the middle east--as "Arabics"). But he hasn't been fired, despite no legal constraints on our principal. (He does happen to coach the football team...hmmmmmm...)
So, how does your well-thought-out solution help my school?
Next thing to think about: if a software corporation has trouble producing a good product, and it is discovered that its employees have extremely low morale, extremely high turnover, work in pretty dismal conditions, have a whole host of duties unrelated to their fields of expertise (which take up as much if not more time than their actual programming work), work 10-20% more hours per year than typical American employees (but squeeze it all into 38 weeks, instead of 50), and are paid much less than similarly qualified people in other fields, what might this corporation consider doing?
sincerely,
DCQ
if a software corporation has trouble producing a good product, and it is discovered that its employees have extremely low morale, extremely high turnover, work in pretty dismal conditions, have a whole host of duties unrelated to their fields of expertise (which take up as much if not more time than their actual programming work), work 10-20% more hours per year than typical American employees (but squeeze it all into 38 weeks, instead of 50), and are paid much less than similarly qualified people in other fields, what might this corporation consider doing?
Bring the job back from India?
Spoiled high school teens say they'll whine until their parents plunk down $500 for iPhone
Why do teens think they need cellular phones? Why do their parents agree? For that matter, why do most adults think they need to be -- or want to be -- that in-touch? They're waiting for a call from the President? Obviously, independent, accountable thought is a thing of the past....
Will it remain that way as nearly every industrialized nation in the world beats our (US) students in reading, writing, and arithmetic.
But, damn, can they work that text pad!...
Why do teens think they need cellular phones? Why do their parents agree?
I've heard of numerous situations where it's actually good for a teen to have a phone, but I see absolutely no reason for a teenager to have an iPhone. Aside from the fact that most teens will still only use the texting and calling features -- maybe some of the Web to update their blogs or MySpace pages
Unlike the iPod, the iPhone also requires a 2 year subscription with AT&T. The logistics of the required service and contract make it harder for the iPhone to become ubiquitous among the younger generation.
If I were to be a parent, I'd buy an iPhone for my beloved son/daughter if they accept my 2 year subscription service plan of mowing my lawn, ironing my clothes and washing my car
Of course I'd give them free hugs from time to time.
You know rich people who cannot read, write, or add? I seriously doubt they will stay rich for long. How would you know your accountant, lawyer, or business partner isn't ripping you off?
I won't say they display all of those deficiencies in combination, but yes, it's true. Intellectuals like to think they represent the highest strata of society, but it's just not so. If one is adept at working with and manipulating people to build and exploit a business, that is what leads to monetary success. I know of more stories of wealthy individuals who ignored their limitations and pounced upon whatever opportunities they could create, than stories of intellectually gifted individuals in the same position... but then again, that might just be the crowd I roll with.