a Los Angeles area charter school where students are receiving a lesson in the politics of rich and poor straight out of a third world country.
As Magiera recounts on her blog BellaNoise, her son’s junior high decided to add to the school’s traditional spring dance. Tickets to the event would be $15 — for the mere peons, that is. For the more well-to-do — or simply socially desperate — the school decided to charge an extra $5 for admission to a “VIP Lounge,” where, among other things, students would receive special access to a dessert bar and a swag bag. Magiera was horrified, and forbid her son from buying his way into special privileges…
winners of the lucky sperm and egg club raffle get to buy their way into the VIP Lounge while those with less in the way of funds get an early lesson in how they will likely spend their lives on the wrong side of the red velvet line, courtesy of their own school. And no, this is not just an ”only in LA” story. Such situations are becoming increasingly common…
The school gives kids eligible for free school lunches extra spins in the school lottery used to determine admissions, which means there is likely a decent population of children in attendance who lack the $5 to separate themselves from the mass of their fellow students.
New West principal Sharon Weir did not respond to emails or telephone calls seeking comment. So instead I turned to Madeline Levine, the author of the soon to be published Teach Your Children Well, for clarification. ”Frankly, this VIP idea reflects badly on kids, but even worse on the adults,” she told me. ”No one gains from making some kids more ‘special’ than others, especially when special is based on having a few extra bucks.”
Inconsistency with ourselves is the great weakness of human nature.
~ Joseph Addison
My favorite dresses on:
Eva Longoria — Pretty dress.
Natasha Poly — Color & style, not the fabric.
Karolina Kurkova — Love this design!!
However, I’d like to be known for creating my own wealth.
5. Birgit Rausing
Rausing, who inherited her father-in-law’s Swiss packaging company when her husband died in 2000, is worth an estimated $13.8 billion, according to Wealth-X.
3. Christy Walton
Walton inherited her share of the Walmart fortune after the passing of her husband John and is currently worth $28.2 billion, according to Wealth-X. In addition to her Walmart stake, Walton netted big bucks from a smart bet her husband made on First Solar, according to Forbes.
2. Gina Rinehart
Judged by some indexes to be the world’s richest woman, Rinehart made her billions as daughter of an Australian mining magnate. She’s worth $29.1 billion, according to Wealth-X.
1. Alice Walton
Walton was able to push her way to the top of the list at $29.8 billion thanks to Walmart stock trading at a 12-year high, according to Wealth-X. The daughter of Walmart founder Sam Walton established an art museum in Bentonville, Arkansas, the town that’s home to Walmart’s (sic)
I spent 3+ hours rehearsing. 10+ hours filming. 12+ hours working on pulling film stills.
My friend will be editing the final video. Hopefully, it will be completed in time for a 1 June group screening of student films.
The game is very simple. It’s played between two people who have to decide how to split an amount of money. Let’s say it’s $100.
One of the two people is randomly chosen to make an offer to the other about how to split the money between them. If the other person accepts this offer then they split it on that basis. But, if the other person rejects it, neither of them gets anything.
The reason some economists and psychologists have got excited about it is because of how people behave when they play this game. What you find is that most people make offers of splitting the cash somewhere between 40% and 50%. Generally speaking if an offer is made below about 30% it will be rejected by the other person more often than not.
The Ultimatum Game has been pointed to as a way of showing that humans are economically irrational. Why do people reject an offer of 25% of the total pot? If the pot is $100 then they are choosing between getting $25 or nothing at all. So why do they choose nothing at all?
The answer seems to be that people generally find offers below 30% to be insulting. It’s insulting that the other person should suggest such a derisory sum, even when it’s free money. So they prefer to have nothing and punish the other person’s greed. And remember the other person is losing $75 in this case whereas I’m only losing $25…