Sunday, October 24, 2010

"Tai-Tais by 20"

The headline (Sunday Times, October 24, 2010; Home 11) caught my eyes!

Wow! I thought it was about a change in the trend - people tying a knot at in the early 20s?
No, I was wrong! It's about teenagers/ youngsters leading the life of the a tai-tai, where main their source of income is their parents!

From the article: $10,000 for a bag, more than 50 pairs of shoes, monthly allowance of $1,500 plus $2,000 a year for skincare expenses. Wow! Wow! High maintenance cost for youngsters nowadays.

I think what made me think again were what they said
  • "... After all, my parents do not mind" (Li Lin, 20)
  • "I don't think it has to do with peer pressure. Perhaps it is more a matter of upbringing. My family values quality, and branded items are usually of a higher quality." (Rachel, 19)
  • "If you can afford to buy things you think look nice, then why not?" (Parent)
I was amazed of the lavish lifestyle these teenagers lead! and their responses to the spending pattern! Values! Values! that we emphasized so much... "Want" vs "Need".

But I do agree with one line "a matter of upbringing". Yup, the "desire" of lavish spending could be either encouraged by their parents because it's the "family belief", or it could be developed (over time) because parents felt obliged to give their children the "best" (or it's a compensation of what areas they lack to fulfill as parents such as spending time with their kids?)

At a get-together last week, a friend shared another suprising 'practice' - surprising because the mother is an educator! The child just completed her university and started to look for a job. However, none of the jobs offered had the salary pegged at the amount she expects. Guess what? The mother actually "top up" the salary! It's the most outrageous practice I ever heard!

Indeed, using simple mathematics, we would be able to see the impact of spending equivalent amount of money to provide support to the needy in the other part of the world (http://www.unicef.org/emerg/index.html)

Wait a minute... why only females were featured in the article... hm....

No comments: