Banning Luxury Winter Coats To Try And Prevent “Poverty Shaming”
A school in England has recently taken to banning designer coats on the school grounds in an effort to try and stop 'poverty shaming'.
School authorities say that the kids are putting too much pressure on the parents to buy these coats. Are they also going to initiate a ban on backpacks, phones, and a variety of other items that can also be bought in the designer variety?
To try and ban these jackets in an effort to craft a safe space for some students so that they don't feel bad about not being able to afford those goods, will do them more harm than good because it doesn't help to prepare them for the real world.
Some of the parents have celebrated the decision.
Are they going to seek out a ban on birthday parties next? After all, birthday parties place a ton of pressure on parents to try and compete with the other parties that their children attend. What about the children being dropped off at school in luxury vehicles? Will they soon be asked to asked to park further away from the school?
Canada Goose has become one of the most popular brands for winter wear, allegedly growing more than 2,000 percent over the last decade, seeing revenues over $300 million.
For some, they might feel that their needs are met with a jacket that costs upwards of $400 and for others, they're going to be happily satisfied with a $59 parka. Some will tell you that the investment in a quality winter jacket is surely worth it, while many others will maintain that your money is better spent elsewhere.
School authorities have said that they have intentions to “poverty-proof” the school but that isn't creating a realistic learning environment for the children. It's further crippling them and their ability to deal with what they will be faced with once they get outside of school. To achieve their intended goal of "poverty proofing" the environment, there are many other restrictions that they could initiate and even then they still wouldn't achieve their objective.
Pics:
Pixabay
Come on, even under the communist regime when almost no one in my country had access to designer stuff kids still knew whose parents were rich and whose were poor. You can dress them the same down to underwear, they'll still gonna know who has a better car, who goes on holiday in Hawaii. These people are mental.
just wait until they ban holidays though
"Poverty proof the school". This reminds me of Bushe's famous "No Child Left Behind" line, which is perfect, because the statement is a great summarization of our cultures attitude towards hardship in general. How many times have we heard "there must be something we can do!". We need more people ringing back "Sorry buddy, that's not the way the world works. This isn't a game of rainbows and unicorns; this is reality. There will always be people who live in tragedy and pain, and the most you can do is mitigate it.". My view can be best summarized by the economist Thomas Sowell "The primary lesson of economics is there are no solutions, only tradeoffs." I wish that was taught in school. I swear we'd have a completely different world.
@doitvoluntarily hello dear friend, this is something meaningless, the prohibitions have never arisen a posito effect, totally wrong the decision making
Thank you very much for letting us know this information
I wish you a great day
This world is ever more insane by the day.
But this type of thing does go along with their ultimate goal of creating a wholly dependent slave race of uni-race NPC humanoids... lol
@doitvoluntarily I think they are wrong to take those restrictions that is not the way to protect poverty
this is a great topic very interesting thanks for sharing friend
It is good that they make this decision so that all children feel the same and that is how we are before the eyes of God, great friendly article
I'm sorry to hear this. I guess social shaming doesn't work on me. But when you're young you're more easily influenced. What's a cultural and educational experience to be in the environment of all social status types I know and value their uniquenesses.
There is a problem but this isnt neccessary the solution. We need to eliminate poverty and redistribute wealth so that everyone can afford stuff.
That being said, boo fucking hoo to all the rich pricks, buy a cheaper coat. It's not hard. Rich kids showing off their wealth causes lots of material trauma for poor people, and because of that I very much so dislike the attitude of this post.
Posted using Partiko Android
If tomorrow you gave everyone 1 million dollars, the next day you would have inequality again....because some people would spend and some would save.. You cannot ever fully eliminate poverty, because the needs for the whole group are always changing on a daily basis.
What portion of what I earn do you think should be yours?..1%? 50%? and why do you feel entitled to own a portion of what other people have worked for?...that's sort of like..stealing isn't it? If you only have compassion and empathy for people who are just like you, then that doesn't really say much does it?✌
This is why capitalism as a concept needs to be obliterated. All it is is a leaderboard of human value that dehumanizes everyone around you.
Posted using Partiko Android
capitalism is simply private property ownership and voluntary exchange. There is nothing inherently evil about it. Do You not own your own body?... which is what private property rights are an extension of (your labour etc)... Capitalism is the reason that millions of people have had their standards of living raised to the point where you now have people enjoying a standard of living that even kings didn't enjoy only a century ago. Don't confuse crony capitalism with free markets,.. which is what we have today where there are privileged monopolies who use coercion to prevent others from doing well.✌
again could you answer, what portion of my earnings do you think should be yours?... 1%?? 50?....
I think trying to use violence via the state to bring others around you - who you see as being superior to you in wealth- to a lower point in life, is rather dehumanizing...
This is a pretty naive position you're taking. Are you really willing to offer a false choice percentage of earnings to keep? Do you really think you can vaguely argue for capitalism on a natural rights basis like this? It's very poor.
There's a lot of nuance and I'm surprised you're not willing to put that forward. Think again.
What is naive, id say, is to see that a central authority that rules via force has performed miserably for thousands of years, but yet insisting on maintaining that status quo as if you're going to somehow get different result some day.
I don't need to argue for capitalism, because the market speaks for itself..the proof is all around us..the market brings us the goods!:) 👌
You don't need to argue it and yet you do, but in a biased and condescending way, so it's not effective at all.
The validity and integrity of political and economic systems are not self evident. Their proofs do require some insight, inspection, knowledge of history and and critically some depth of understanding of moral philosophy. The starts of these are often intuitive as we pick up so much in our lives but large parts are counterintuitive, partially for the same reason, partially because it's nuanced and complex.
So it would be great to see you become more honest about what you're doing here, which is obviously a steady information campaign amongst other things, and recognize the complexity which is obvious in practice in your frequent posts.
You will not make any friends in the leftist camp on your current path.
You have no idea what you're talking about and sound like a typical out-of-touch rich kid lmfao
Capitalism didnt raise standards of living, technological advancements did.
States can only exist in capitalist societies. Borders, countries, owning land are all capitalist inventions. Same with imperialism. Note, that genocide from imperialism is just capitalism with land and direct action. Capitalism in current year is just genocide of poor people by restricting basic resources under the guise of money. Money is theft, property is theft. We have enough resources on Earth for everyone to live happily and healthily, but instead we have folk like Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos stealing all the wealth and sacrificing the lives of everyone around them to try to hit the top of the leaderboard. Capitalism is sacrificing the poor's lives to get "Cool Stuff" and just pretending its justified.
Anyone making over 300,000 usd per year has a happiness rating that is stagnant and on par with those that make millions per year, so why have more than that when billions are starving and poor? Because you're a selfish bastard who hates poor people (no other option, sorry).
Anarchism, communism, and intersectionality are the only morally and ethically correct options.
Remember your post about the death penalty? How do you take into account the 50,000 people who die per year in the US because of lack of health insurance? That's capitalism 101. Sacrifice.
Posted using Partiko Android
How do you square this statement and your crypto trading?
And how do you figure you're mainlining the truth here? This kind of black and white thinking is lazy.
I live in a capitalist society and need to eat. Plain and simple 😊
It's not black and white by definition. Intersectionality is an all inclusive position, it's just that we dont want to see people needlessly suffering. Victimless ways of living are better than those that require human sacrifice.
Posted using Partiko Android
Then it sounds like you need to revise the use of the word "only". You cannot be sure your way is the only moral path, it's arrogant to claim it, especially as you're saying here you are willing to ignore this for practical reasons (and to have fun, there is an unmistakable Glee in your trading posts).
I guess you haven't seen 1 of the many hundreds of articles i've written? and just because you disagree with me now here on this one, you rudely conclude that I must be "out of touch"...✌ well, i'm sorry you got so triggered by my words,... I know the promotion of voluntary exchanges and private property ownership is quite radical today, sadly lol...
you wouldn't have had those technological advancements without capitalism and private property ownership.
Why do you feel that you have a right to tell other people how much money they should be comfortable living with? It just seems rather.. controlling? Why try to tell other people how to live their life? .. that reeks of statism, force, coercion. I prefer voluntary exchanges and people co-operating based upon mutual benefit which is the essence of capitalism. Anarchism and capitalism are one in the same.
If you want to organize a communist community VOLUNTARILY then I don't care, please leave me out of it. Of course, that is never what communists mean though, they always mean to include everyone in their utopia by force.. well I will never be interested. I am only interested in voluntary and peaceful exchanges, not coerced ones. Communism founded upon such force is no utopia or "moral" high ground.
I just followed you of course, and you know that. Dehumanizing people as "triggered" is also pretty ableist and doesnt really advance a discussion much. I'm talking to you right now and judging what you say in the moment. If that's not good enough feel free to extrapolate on any miscommuniction.
And yes, we would have. Science was developed in less capitalist societies just as well if it better in many places. Capitalism and innovation are not congruent in any fashion. Imagine a world without sharing our knowledge. Why is communism ok when it comes to sharing research, but not ok everywhere else?
Science and data literally explains the happiness index and how it functions. Also it is controlling to prevent billions of people from eating, but o guess that doesnt matter since that's built into the system and not relevant, right?
Anarchy is actually the direct opposite of capitalism. Capitalism directly involves monetary hierarchy that unequalizes the playing field, people will always have more power than others. Anarchy involves a system where we are all equal without rule of state. You cannot have anarchy and capitalism.
"""Voluntary exchange""" for rich people is cool in theory, but again, it's all sacrificing the lives of billions of others. You think capitalism works because you aren't directly exposed to the people that are being thrown away like garbage as a result of your greed and roleplaying. We dont live in a meritocracy and pretending like we do is foolish and ignorant.
Communism doesnt require human force. Climate change is going to force us all to abandon this failed capitalist system soon enough.
Anarchy and communism go hand in hand. No one should have power and rule over others. Capitalism cannot exist with anarchy by definition. You are wrong and very misguided.
Posted using Partiko Android