I don't usually pick up the newspapers these days. Sure, it seems rather thick (funnily?) recently but election issues don't really interest me..which apparently we're not supposed to blog about lest we use our supernaturally contagious blogging powers to unfairly influence the polling results..so anyway, while walking past the dining table on sunday (the newspapers are placed there, just in case you're wondering what the dining table had to do with anything), the following headline caught my attention:
Here are a few rather lovely quotes from the two page article (found on pages 14/15 in the main section of The Sunday Times)..
"Miss Lesley Tan, 24, admits that she could get by on her $2,000 salary as a pupil in a law firm, but says she would be forced to cut down on her shopping..Her parents pay the $340 monthly bill for their daughter parking her car at the Fullerton Hotel and have also funded some of her more extravagant shopping purchases, such as a $3,000 Chanel handbag and a pair of $600 Ferragamo shoes"
Lest you guys are having smug looks on your faces, shaking your heads and remarking "Girls and their shopping"..check out this cool dude!
"Armed with three supplementary credit cards from his mother, (public relations executive, Leonard Tan, 23) indulges his designer tastes at top boutiques like Hugo Boss and DKNY. His mother also covers his mobile phone bills, which can reach up to $600."
And now for the loveliest part..
"All this in spite of him earning $3,300 a month (!!!). "I make it a point to return a token sum to my mother, so she won't think I'm abusing my privileges and to also show that I'm responsible for my spending," he said."
Hey if anyone thinks that miss lesley is a bitch, at least she's an honest one acknowledging that she'd have to make drastic changes without her parents' subsidies..mr leonard tan on the other hand, is in denial mode and seems to have a problem with the english language and with morals in general..now, which part of the word responsible does he not understand? Even if he earns half of his current salary, splurging consistently on branded goods is not responsible..what more earning $3,300 a month and still having his mum pay for his phone bills! And to even regard returning "token sums" as responsible is irresponsible and immatured!
What i cannot understand is how the parents can encourage their children to pursue such material goods..i mean paying for their studies and maybe transportation is still acceptable but for Chanel, DKNY and phone bills even when they are working adults? While the government is concerned about singaporeans' general financial stability, this report brings about a new problem..how about those "kids" who are financially stable (but financially dependent) now? What will happen when they are left on their own and they have to feed their families? Cook their leather shoes and jackets for food? Drink their branded perfumes? Sell their branded stuff on eBay, yahoo or Cash Convertors claiming they have been worn by some local star?
I know this post reeks of jealousy and sour grapes but if you know me well enough, i've worked since my poly days and i've never asked a single cent from my parents to subsidise my phone and cable bills (yes i rejected even though they offered to!), my studies or even my cds! Even when i needed money, i'd get it from my brother so that i know i can return it back to him. In a way, i've been lucky to be where i am today and i can proudly say that i did it mostly on my own..and contrary to most common and conservative beliefs, mine is not down to hardwork..cuz frankly, i am probably one of the laziest people around! If you asked me, i'd say that it was all just determination (and a quite a bit of luck) - and it's more a determination to gain my independence and be answerable to myself rather than to prove anybody right or wrong..
As a parting shot, here's some food for thought..in the above mentioned report, ALL the spoilt brats featured are above 21..and 6th of may isn't that far away now is it?
5 comments:
Ah yes... But all these (your jobs, money) were not from your earthly father(and mother) but from your heavenly Father =)
We can't do anything alone. =)
urrr..you lost me there..
the problem here is that people are craving for more than what they need..and at the expense of their parents..sure, i agree everything comes ultimately from God but isn't this a case of abusing God's gifts to us? it's like God has given you a certain amount but you are not contented with it..
i think here it's more a case of irresponsibility towards one's parents than it is a case of acknowledging God's gifts to us..
there is this "fren" (gf's fren's fren's fren's fren.......'s fren)of mine who actually "borrowed" more than a hundred grands from her parent to go US to study culinary. after she graduated, she again "borrowed" more money from her rich mum to set up a store, selling cold porridges. A couple of months later, she closed down her store due to the fact that more mozzies visited her store, compared to human beings. Here comes the best part... after all the money spent on the culinary degree, she is doing MLM now. VAT THE HELL!!!!
you know... i think sometimes it's becos alot of Singaporeans parents don't know how 2 let go. My sister has already been working for a while but my dad will still from time to time give her some small token of cash. (And my sis just takes it readily :|)
And when I refused to take money from him just now, he actually said "I was stubborn!!!"
Get wad I mean? It's a two-way thing really but yes, I think children should exercise some sense of responsibility but sometimes I think we are brought up in an environment that allows us to still depend alot on our parents...
that's true also..it's both the fault of the parents and the children at times..in a way, i guess children can be more responsible with the way they use the money as well instead of splurging entirely on material things..
Post a Comment