Entrepreneur or a bit of a scallywag?

[aliceBB]

 

Ye that's what I did and I got completely slated, then someone trying to take the P**S

 

 

Define 'completely slated'?

[PeteMorris]

Well having caught up on the thread from over the weekend, it's certainly stirred some debate.

 

I still don't see what's soooo wrong. In my day, scallywags (bullies) would rob the kids of their dinner money...or even steal their sandwiches, and I'm pretty sure this behaviour hasn't suddenly stopped. Now we have 'government guideline' as to what kids should or shouldn't be eating, and how they should be regimented and rules imposed forcing them to 'enjoying' raw carrots and lettuce, along with an apple...or whatever. Kids don't want that!....So he's just filling a gap in the market!

 

I hear talk of him not being entrepreneurial because it's a captive market. Isn't that always the way people make money? That's why your giant tub of popcorn costs an arm and a leg at the cinema...purely and simply because it's a captive market, and it's against cinema 'rules' to take your own beverages or food into them! Ever taken your own refreshments into a cinema and 'broken the rules'?

 

Then there was the case of the schoolchildren's parents taking orders for fish and chips and handing them through the fence to their little darlings. I'm not saying that was right...But it's just a classic example of kids NOT liking or wanting the 'healthy options' forced upon them and provided by the school.

 

Entrepreneurs see a gap in the market, especially if it's a captive audience and exploit it to it's fullest extent....Ask Alan Sugar, or Richard Branson, or James Dyson....

[charmer]

I'm not sure that 'empathy' has got much to do with it, really. We were asked our opinion of what this young man had done. Even if you are able to 'empathise' with his greed for making money regardless, it is still an ethical question and from any moral perspective, what he is doing is indefensible.

 

Perhaps someone who is impressed by the MO of this 15 year old would like to attempt to refute all the arguments I have put forward as to why such approbation would be misplaced. In particular, perhaps they would like to explain why it is a cause for celebration when a teenager breaks school rules for personal gain and why opportunistic profiteering regardless of the wider consequences is A Good Thing (in their view).

 

I believe the boy should be punished, but why is what he is doing morally indefensible? Do you level this accusation at all confectionery retailers?

[alternageek]

Mod Note:

 

Please refrain from making personal attacks against other members.

 

Also, if your post has been removed, do NOT repost it. If you continue to do so, may face a timeout from the forum.

 

Thanks.

[chem1st]

If this kid was 10 years older and selling weed, the freemarketeers wouldn't be so keen to praise his entrepeneurial skills.

 

I wonder how long before they brand sugar a gateway drug and have health images put upon packets.

[aliceBB]

I still don't see what's soooo wrong. In my day, scallywags (bullies) would rob the kids of their dinner money...or even steal their sandwiches, and I'm pretty sure this behaviour hasn't suddenly stopped.

Nobody has accused this young man of bullying or theft - just greed and sneakiness. Actually, to me , 'scallywag' connotes merely a lovable rogue - which I don't think he is!

 

Now we have 'government guideline' as to what kids should or shouldn't be eating, and how they should be regimented and rules imposed forcing them to 'enjoying' raw carrots and lettuce, along with an apple...or whatever. Kids don't want that!....So he's just filling a gap in the market!

Just because something is popular does not make it right. Since when has 'what kids want' been the basis of what they are encouraged/allowed to do? Kids like all sorts of things which harm them morally, physically, academically or emotionally in the longer term; it's up to parents (and teachers) to try to educate them into ways of living well and sustainably as individuals in a very consumer-driven society. Excessive amounts of sugar and fat are a scourge of our times and in a society threatened with an explosion obesity and of Type II diabetes in young people, and an NHS which is struggling to cope with it, it is the height of irresponsibility, in my view, to condone such short term, opportunistic profiteering. In an ideal world parents would educate their kids not to eat such junk. Given that many do not, schools do what they can to limit the damage (both short and long term).

 

I hear talk of him not being entrepreneurial because it's a captive market. Isn't that always the way people make money? That's why your giant tub of popcorn costs an arm and a leg at the cinema...purely and simply because it's a captive market, and it's against cinema 'rules' to take your own beverages or food into them! Ever taken your own refreshments into a cinema and 'broken the rules'?

The difference is that people (of any age) are not required by law to attend a cinema in the same way that children are required to attend school. When they are there, the teacher are required to act 'in loco parentis' (in a way that cinema managers are not) and in their parental role during the school day, they cannot allow this lad to operate his sweets racket.

 

Then there was the case of the schoolchildren's parents taking orders for fish and chips and handing them through the fence to their little darlings. I'm not saying that was right...But it's just a classic example of kids NOT liking or wanting the 'healthy options' forced upon them and provided by the school.

If kids - or more pertinently, their parents - do not like the school's healthy eating policy (and clearly some of them are stupid enough not to), they have the option, ultimately, of removing their offspring from school and educating them elsewhere. A school place is a package and there are good reasons for the rules. Flouting the rules simply undermines any respect your kids have for the place, and they are far less It was a moronic thing to do, in my view, and not just from a nutritional perspective. Kids are far less likely to succeed academically when they see their parents have no respect for the staff and openly break the rules.

 

In any case, the evidence from the Jamie Oliver campaign (now there's a real entrepreneur!) suggests that once kids have emerged from the junk food withdrawl stage, they will eat most things quite cheerfully. Even broccoli!

 

Entrepreneurs see a gap in the market, especially if it's a captive audience and exploit it to it's fullest extent....Ask Alan Sugar, or Richard Branson, or James Dyson....

I ask again : there is a clear gap in the market for people to flog alcohol and cigarettes to patients in hospitals which have a no-alcohol, and no smoking policy. Would that be OK then, if someone spotted this gap and started up a profitable little business there?

 

---------- Post added 24-11-2014 at 12:57 ----------

 

I believe the boy should be punished, but why is what he is doing morally indefensible? Do you level this accusation at all confectionery retailers?

 

Children are not captive audiences for confectionery retailers. Nobody forces a child to go into a sweet shop. It is up to the parents, when the child is out of school, to supervise how much money they have and how much of it they spend on sweets. Some parents are responsible about this and some are clueless.

 

At school, it is different. See my post above about teachers being in loco parentis, the 'parentis' bit assuming a responsible, rather than clueless parent.

Edited November 24, 2014 by aliceBB

[PeteMorris]

Nobody has accused this young man of bullying or theft - just greed and sneakiness. Actually, to me , 'scallywag' connotes merely a lovable rogue - which I don't think he is!

 

So you think he's some kind of monster with some kind of satanic agenda? He's flogging sweets for goodness sake that the other kids are all too happy to buy. Does it not suggest that the school's 'healthy eating' policy fails miserably?

 

Just because something is popular does not make it right

 

It doesn't make it wrong either!

 

Since when has 'what kids want' been the basis of what they are encouraged/allowed to do? Kids like all sorts of things which harm them morally, physically, academically or emotionally in the longer term. Excessive amounts of sugar and fat are one of those things and in a society threatened with an explosion of Type II diabetes in young people, and an NHS which is struggling to cope with it, it is the height of irresponsibility, in my view, to condone such short term, opportunistic profiteering. In an ideal world parents would educate their kids not to eat such junk. Given that many do not, schools do what they can to limit the damage (both short and long term).

 

And fail miserably!

 

 

The difference is that people (of any age) are not required by law to attend a cinema in the same way that children are required to attend school. When they are there, the teacher are required to act 'in loco parentis' (in a way that cinema managers are not) and in their parental role during the school day, they cannot allow this lad to operate his sweets racket.

 

Why is it a 'racket'....Is he using extortion? Bullying? I'd be surprised if the school 'rules' specifically stated that you cannot sell sweets and drinks to other students. All he's doing is infringing 'a healthy eating policy'....Which last time I was aware isn't law!

 

If kids - or more pertinently, their parents - do not like the school's healthy eating policy (and clearly some of them are stupid enough not to), they have the option, ultimately, of removing their offspring from school and educating them elsewhere. A school place is a package and there are good reasons for the rules. Flouting the rules simply undermines any respect your kids have for the place, and they are far less It was a moronic thing to do, in my view, and not just from a nutritional perspective. Kids are far less likely to succeed academically when they see their parents have no respect for the staff and openly break the rules.

 

A healthy eating policy is a policy...Not law!.....Why is it a 'moronic' thing to do?.....So the kid's a moron?....Seems to me, he's providing for his future education by funding himself through uni....Maybe he wouldn't have to do that if tuition fees hadn't been introduced?.....Did you have to pay your way through uni and end up with a lifelong debt when you became a teacher?

 

In any case, the evidence suggest that once kids have emerged from the junk food withdrawl stage, they will eat most things quite cheerfully. Even broccoli!

 

Junk food withdrawal?....So it's a drug now?....I personally don't like broccoli, and no amount of healthy eating indoctrination when I was or kid or now would persuade me to eat it...it's vile stuff....Why would today's kids think any different? (Assuming they don't like it either)

 

I ask again : there is a clear gap in the market for people to flog alcohol and cigarettes to patients in hospitals which have a no-alcohol, and no smoking policy. Would that be OK then, if someone spotted this gap and started up a profitable little business there?

 

Ummmm....you really don't live in the real world...or seem to be oblivious to it. I've seen hospital porters fetch Pizza or cigarettes, even fish and chips (not so sure about alcohol) to patients in hospitals...it happens a lot. I'm not sure they make a profit, but it happens I assure you.....Definitely food though...How many times have you heard stories about the food in hospitals being dreadful and had it not been for people bringing 'other' food or goodies in they'd have starved.

 

Profiteering is everywhere. Get on a plane and you can't take alcohol, but they'll happily serve you alcoholic drinks....at an unreasonably inflated price....it's the way of the world.

[aliceBB]

None of your points addresses any of mine, really, and there are several fatal flaws in your reasoning. Perhaps we had better agree to differ on this one.

[ab6262]

Ok we get some people don't like greed? well greed is good it works! our world works on it, it sorts the haves from the have nots and equals success in a lot of cases, i admit it isn't very fair but when has life ever been fair?.

If it were my son i would be congratulating him for having the B...s to go for it and having a jump up on his classmates.

The school should have encouraged him and maybe rented him a desk in the hallway at break time??? and the proceeds of rent going to charity? , that way his flair for an opportunity is tempered.

I asked a question earlier about anyone's view of Sir Richard Branson?? maybe one for you Alice?

 

i think that's Ok? Mods

Edited November 24, 2014 by ab6262

[PeteMorris]

None of your points addresses any of mine, really, and there are several fatal flaws in your reasoning. Perhaps we had better agree to differ on this one.

 

Well I did attempt to address your post in it's entirety as you did mine. We do obviously see things differently, and of course we're both entitled to an opinion, even though it might be poles apart.

 

I just don't see the kid as some kind of 'moron' (as you so eloquently called him).