kids and money
nellebelle
I've been giving my kids allowance for awhile now. No strings. They get paid on the first of each month, no matter how tight our finances are (and they are plenty tight!). It is fun to watch them make choices with THEIR money.
Jackie is eager to earn more. She has done amazingly well with koolaid/lemonade stands, but that is seasonal. She regularly asks about getting jobs, but there is not a huge job market for 10 year olds. We pet-sit and she gets a share of that. She gets some money for birthdays and randomly from her Gramma.
Today I offered to pay the girls for doing some of the daily tasks that I do. I made it clear they don't have to participate. We discussed how some of their friends only get their allowance IF they have fulfilled obligations. My girls will continue to get an allowance even if they have no interest in these additional tasks. It is a way for them to earn more money. They can choose a task or more any day they wish but don't have to.
I'm not looking for Better Homes and Gardens, but my house has gotten to the point where we can't find things. I've read Punished By Rewards. I hope I'm not setting myself up for kids who will only do for money. However, I'm simply overwhelmed with more to do than I can handle. Some days it seems that too much of my attention is to basic tasks - laundry, meals, general tidying; yet the house is still a wreck.
When I brought up the idea of paying for tasks, Jackie got excited. We sat and made a list of things that they could do when they want to.
Jackie said that it seems I'm buying time. We had a nice talk about that.
Have others found benefits or problems with paying their children for household/yard chores?
Mary Ellen
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Jackie is eager to earn more. She has done amazingly well with koolaid/lemonade stands, but that is seasonal. She regularly asks about getting jobs, but there is not a huge job market for 10 year olds. We pet-sit and she gets a share of that. She gets some money for birthdays and randomly from her Gramma.
Today I offered to pay the girls for doing some of the daily tasks that I do. I made it clear they don't have to participate. We discussed how some of their friends only get their allowance IF they have fulfilled obligations. My girls will continue to get an allowance even if they have no interest in these additional tasks. It is a way for them to earn more money. They can choose a task or more any day they wish but don't have to.
I'm not looking for Better Homes and Gardens, but my house has gotten to the point where we can't find things. I've read Punished By Rewards. I hope I'm not setting myself up for kids who will only do for money. However, I'm simply overwhelmed with more to do than I can handle. Some days it seems that too much of my attention is to basic tasks - laundry, meals, general tidying; yet the house is still a wreck.
When I brought up the idea of paying for tasks, Jackie got excited. We sat and made a list of things that they could do when they want to.
Jackie said that it seems I'm buying time. We had a nice talk about that.
Have others found benefits or problems with paying their children for household/yard chores?
Mary Ellen
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Pamela Sorooshian
On Feb 9, 2006, at 10:05 PM, nellebelle wrote:
for the first 20 books (picture books) and then a dime per book for
every book past 20 (per day). Rosie was the third kid and a bit
later reader and had what seemed like a bottomless pit of desire to
be read to. Roxana read out loud REALLY well - she did voices, etc.
This worked really well for us.
I still read to her, too, by the way.
-pam
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> Jackie said that it seems I'm buying time. We had a nice talkCool. True. Good useful insight!
> about that.
>I paid Roxana to read to Rosie. I used to pay her a nickel per book
> Have others found benefits or problems with paying their children
> for household/yard chores?
for the first 20 books (picture books) and then a dime per book for
every book past 20 (per day). Rosie was the third kid and a bit
later reader and had what seemed like a bottomless pit of desire to
be read to. Roxana read out loud REALLY well - she did voices, etc.
This worked really well for us.
I still read to her, too, by the way.
-pam
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
On Feb 9, 2006, at 11:05 PM, nellebelle wrote:
time. We had a discussion last week. Kirby spent real money on game
money. When I was asking him about it (not in a critical way, just
"what do you mean?"), he and Marty were both jumping in to explain.
Kirby was pro, and Marty was critical. Marty talked about it not
being fair or right. I asked whether it would be like buying
neopoints (the only you-earn-spendable-points) game I play. Marty
said yes, exactly.
From Kirby's point of view, he could earn points by playing the game
more, but he's already working and teaching karate and should be also
taking a couple of karate courses each week, but he would rather hang
out with his gaming buddies on those evenings.
So from the idea of buying time, he works at the pizza place and uses
those "points" in his game.
It's not much different, we figured, from buying a special CCG card
rather than hanging out for hours (hundreds of hours, maybe) to find
it "naturally" in a trade with other card-game guys. If someone buys
a special Magic or L5R card, or whatever, it's not considered to be
cheating.
Keith paid $300 yesterday for a major tune-up on my van, just because
the check engine light came on. Keith's dad or brother could have
done that to their own van; it was points, plugs, timing, clean-up,
new filters, adjustments... Keith could do that, painstakingly, or
he could study and practice and learn to do it faster. But Keith
chose to work at Honeywell for "Honeywell points" and spend them at
the auto repair shop. <bwg> He bought time.
Sandra
> Jackie said that it seems I'm buying time. We had a nice talkSorry this isn't about chores, but it is about the idea of buying
> about that.
time. We had a discussion last week. Kirby spent real money on game
money. When I was asking him about it (not in a critical way, just
"what do you mean?"), he and Marty were both jumping in to explain.
Kirby was pro, and Marty was critical. Marty talked about it not
being fair or right. I asked whether it would be like buying
neopoints (the only you-earn-spendable-points) game I play. Marty
said yes, exactly.
From Kirby's point of view, he could earn points by playing the game
more, but he's already working and teaching karate and should be also
taking a couple of karate courses each week, but he would rather hang
out with his gaming buddies on those evenings.
So from the idea of buying time, he works at the pizza place and uses
those "points" in his game.
It's not much different, we figured, from buying a special CCG card
rather than hanging out for hours (hundreds of hours, maybe) to find
it "naturally" in a trade with other card-game guys. If someone buys
a special Magic or L5R card, or whatever, it's not considered to be
cheating.
Keith paid $300 yesterday for a major tune-up on my van, just because
the check engine light came on. Keith's dad or brother could have
done that to their own van; it was points, plugs, timing, clean-up,
new filters, adjustments... Keith could do that, painstakingly, or
he could study and practice and learn to do it faster. But Keith
chose to work at Honeywell for "Honeywell points" and spend them at
the auto repair shop. <bwg> He bought time.
Sandra
Sandra Dodd
On Feb 10, 2006, at 1:15 AM, Pamela Sorooshian wrote:
When Holly was a baby, I sometimes paid Kirby to play with Marty. It
wasn't to let Marty play with him, it was to play what Marty wanted
to play, at Marty's speed, Marty's way. It was never for more than
about a half an hour, and Kirby didn't have to. His desire in those
days was Ninja Turtle figures, and he was only five and six and seven
in those days.
I had never thought about it before, but that might have contributed
to Kirby's being good at running Pokemon League when he first
started working at the gaming shop when he was fourteen. That's why
they hired him, because he was good at helping the younger kids, and
he understood all the intricacies of Pokeman Gymnasium business, but
the company would only "count the wins" if a store employee had run
the tournament. So Kirby was given a job, and I used to hear mushy
reports from parents and older store employees about how good he was
with the kids.
Sandra
> -=-I paid Roxana to read to Rosie. I used to pay her a nickel per book============
> for the first 20 books (picture books) and then a dime per book for
> every book past 20 (per day). Rosie was the third kid and a bit
> later reader and had what seemed like a bottomless pit of desire to
> be read to. Roxana read out loud REALLY well - she did voices, etc.-=-
When Holly was a baby, I sometimes paid Kirby to play with Marty. It
wasn't to let Marty play with him, it was to play what Marty wanted
to play, at Marty's speed, Marty's way. It was never for more than
about a half an hour, and Kirby didn't have to. His desire in those
days was Ninja Turtle figures, and he was only five and six and seven
in those days.
I had never thought about it before, but that might have contributed
to Kirby's being good at running Pokemon League when he first
started working at the gaming shop when he was fourteen. That's why
they hired him, because he was good at helping the younger kids, and
he understood all the intricacies of Pokeman Gymnasium business, but
the company would only "count the wins" if a store employee had run
the tournament. So Kirby was given a job, and I used to hear mushy
reports from parents and older store employees about how good he was
with the kids.
Sandra
[email protected]
In a message dated 2/10/2006 12:47:32 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Sandra@... writes:
it feeling like/being bribery? I'm guessing it is in attitude and wording,
but I can't imagine a way to word it that it doesn't sound like bribery to
me...? Thanks for the idea!
Peace,
Sang
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra@... writes:
> When Holly was a baby, I sometimes paid Kirby to play with Marty. ItThat sounds like something Wyl (6) would like. How do you go about it without
> wasn't to let Marty play with him, it was to play what Marty wanted
> to play, at Marty's speed, Marty's way. It was never for more than
> about a half an hour, and Kirby didn't have to. His desire in those
> days was Ninja Turtle figures, and he was only five and six and seven
> in those days.
>
it feeling like/being bribery? I'm guessing it is in attitude and wording,
but I can't imagine a way to word it that it doesn't sound like bribery to
me...? Thanks for the idea!
Peace,
Sang
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
>How do places of business get people to go to work without "bribery"?
> That sounds like something Wyl (6) would like. How do you go about
> it without
> it feeling like/being bribery? I'm guessing it is in attitude and
> wording,
> but I can't imagine a way to word it that it doesn't sound like
> bribery to
> me...? Thanks for the idea!
How do you get an auto dealer to give you a car without bribery?
If someone's supposed to do something anyway and holds out on you
until you pay them, that's a bribe. If something is not someone's
job or someone's property and they negotiate for an exchange, that's
commerce, not bribery.
There are some truisms that are spoken without real examination and I
think the very vague rules against bribery are right up top there.
In a situation in which a kid is supposed to be absolutely obedient
to any spoken whim of the parent, and other parents are advising and
encouraging that parent to "demand obedience," then those advisors
and watchers would say "Don't bribe your child to cooperate, MAKE him
cooperate." MAKE him go to bed at 8:00, brush his teeth the way you
told him to, eat spinach, wear shoes that hurt, MAKE him babysit,
fold the laundry, do the dishes, read to his brother. Don't pay him
to do what he is "supposed" to do, and what he "ought" to do.
The phrases "ought to" and "supposed to" are so old, and have been
recited for so many years (hundreds, in the case of "ought to" at
least) without conscious thought that people don't even think about
what they literally mean. "Supposed to" is kind of easy; you can
deconstruct it, and it loses a lot of power. "Ought" is related to
owing and debt. Obligation. No choice except dishonor.
It's not uncommon for families to require children to take care of
younger siblings, but it does suggest a situation in which that child
is the powerless property of the parent. If a parent decides to
respect the child's wishes and freedom and still wants him to sit
with a younger child and read or play, the older child should be
thought of as a free agent, another human.
If you asked an adult friend to take care of your child, would you
say "And I'm not going to bribe you to do this, either, just do
it!"? Not a good way to keep friends. <g>
A friend might well *offer* to keep your child sometimes, but if you
expected it all the time, or assumed it would be free and at your
convenience, that would be asking too much. So if you look at the
situation that way, asking your older child to put his needs aside
for your benefit, the "ought" is on your end, and you owe him, rather
than him owing you.
Then we can come up against another phrase spoken for generations,
and that is "I don't owe you anything," which has been spoken by
parents to children for a long time, but it's harsh and mean, and in
these days of choice, and in the light of compassion, it's just not
even true.
With over six billion people on the planet, for a parent to expect a
child to say "Than you SO much that you brought me into the world and
gave me life!" is quite a stretch. Life can be harsh and painful.
There is some difference when the mother has absolutely no choice
whatsoever, but in this culture there are lots of ways and times to
say "No" and have it be legal and moral, unlike the life 500 years
ago of a 14 year old child bride who was quite literally given to her
husband by her father and might have four children before she was (by
today's count) grown.
I don't think giving a child something you have in exchange for him
doing something he doesn't owe you to be bribery.
Sandra
Robyn Coburn
<<<<< That sounds like something Wyl (6) would like. How do you go about it
without it feeling like/being bribery? I'm guessing it is in attitude and
wording, but I can't imagine a way to word it that it doesn't sound like
bribery to me...? Thanks for the idea! >>>>
According to Encarta Dictionary "offering bribes" means
"the offering of money or other incentives to persuade somebody to do
something, especially something dishonest or illegal", so no wonder the
word/concept has a bad rap in parenting circles. Maybe people who are afraid
of bribery have the instinctive understanding that the desired
"good/compliant behavior" might be fundamentally inauthentic and a
suppression of true needs so it really is persuading a child to do something
"dishonest".
I don't think that offering to pay your child for a job of work is in the
same league as that kind of bribery. If you would pay another sitter to be a
companion then surely it is ok to pay someone in the family in the same way.
How about just saying "Would you like to earn some extra money by ....."
I think honestly offering to pay a child, with the option to decline, is
much more empowering to the child than any concept of bribery which
disempowers by removing choice and creating obligation. Earning is the
opposite of bribery.
I kinda wish that we could reclaim the word bribery so that every act of
kindness or expression of thanks doesn't get tainted with the idea that some
kind of debt bargain is being made. It makes me feel sad to think that
people are out there thinking that any time they might come home with a toy
they are "bribing" their child for good behavior, so they refrain from doing
it, or do it with strings attached.
I like to give Jayn stuff without expectation or conditions. So far she has
emphatically refused any kind of allowance. The whole idea distresses her.
Robyn L. Coburn
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.8/260 - Release Date: 2/14/2006
without it feeling like/being bribery? I'm guessing it is in attitude and
wording, but I can't imagine a way to word it that it doesn't sound like
bribery to me...? Thanks for the idea! >>>>
According to Encarta Dictionary "offering bribes" means
"the offering of money or other incentives to persuade somebody to do
something, especially something dishonest or illegal", so no wonder the
word/concept has a bad rap in parenting circles. Maybe people who are afraid
of bribery have the instinctive understanding that the desired
"good/compliant behavior" might be fundamentally inauthentic and a
suppression of true needs so it really is persuading a child to do something
"dishonest".
I don't think that offering to pay your child for a job of work is in the
same league as that kind of bribery. If you would pay another sitter to be a
companion then surely it is ok to pay someone in the family in the same way.
How about just saying "Would you like to earn some extra money by ....."
I think honestly offering to pay a child, with the option to decline, is
much more empowering to the child than any concept of bribery which
disempowers by removing choice and creating obligation. Earning is the
opposite of bribery.
I kinda wish that we could reclaim the word bribery so that every act of
kindness or expression of thanks doesn't get tainted with the idea that some
kind of debt bargain is being made. It makes me feel sad to think that
people are out there thinking that any time they might come home with a toy
they are "bribing" their child for good behavior, so they refrain from doing
it, or do it with strings attached.
I like to give Jayn stuff without expectation or conditions. So far she has
emphatically refused any kind of allowance. The whole idea distresses her.
Robyn L. Coburn
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.8/260 - Release Date: 2/14/2006