A nation of $600-present-buying clerks?
I didn’t want to pile on — the Petersons are having a tough time as it is, what with Annette losing her job at the end of the week and with bills that are “three and four weeks behind.” And I know that there are plenty of people losing jobs for reasons beyond their control. And I know that if we couldn’t afford to buy our son any presents this holiday season, we’d feel bad about it.
But then I saw this: “Last year, Peterson and her husband, who works as a graphic artist, spent about $600 on gifts for their 3-year-old daughter.”
Yes, $600. On presents. For one kid. A 3-year-old.
Annette is a hospital registration clerk. I don’t know what her husband was earning as a graphic artist, but since he’s looking for a second job at Walmart, it’s safe to assume that they are not millionaires. They’re behind on their bills even before Annette’s job disappears later this week. Maybe they had more money last year, maybe not, but either way, it is totally irresponsible to spend $600 on presents for a child when you’re having trouble paying bills or even when you’re not, unless you have a lot of money stashed away or you make a lot of money, way, way more than the Petersons make. And it isn’t in the child’s interests for a 3-year-old to be trained to expect mountains of presents.
Look at our government and the endless bailouts and the pressure politicians put on lenders to give money to people who couldn’t pay it back and the growing entitlement mentality and the way people were spending the equity of their homes as if they had found free money. Are we a nation of $600-present-buying clerks? Are we 3-year-olds getting ready to throw a fit if there aren’t enough presents under the tree?
Update: Be sure to read the comments, as Annette Peterson has read my post and clarified her situation and explained that CNN did not accurately report this story. I will leave my post as it was originally written, trusting that the comments clarify the issue sufficiently. (And I hope it is clear that my point wasn’t really about the Petersons in the first place.)
Print This Post
About Scott Stein
Abusive comments may be deleted and abusive commenters may be banned. See comment policies.
I’ll be the first to comment on my own post, which I don’t usually do, since I read in the comments section on CNN, where I found the article, a response from Annette Peterson to the critical comments she was getting from readers on that page:
“I’d like to clarify one thing-We spend 600.00 on the holidays total for our daughter. That was clothes, shoes, a new winter coat, a couple of movies and a few toys. We did not go on a toy shopping spree.”
I don’t know if this is true or not. I can see why after being lambasted by lots of CNN.com readers, she would want to be clear that it wasn’t all on toys, whether or not that’s the case. The way it was characterized by CNN, it seemed to be presents totaling $600, not underwear and a winter coat for the kid. And in the story, Peterson seemed to be feeling guilty for not being able to give her kid presents this year. If I didn’t have enough money to get my child a coat for the winter, I wouldn’t be feeling guilty about the not-getting-presents part of the equation nearly as much as the holy-crap-my-kid’s-going-to-freeze part. But I don’t have any facts beyond what’s in the story.
I don’t report the news (usually). I comment on it. If CNN’s story is misleading, unintentionally or not, and what is called “presents” is really just regular necessities, then I happily retract my specific critique of the Peterson family. Unfortunately, I believe that there are lots of people out there in similar financial circumstances spending far more on presents than they can afford, or that has been the case in recent years before the current economic crisis. So my general point remains, un-retracted.
Scott,
In response to your story I’d like to clarify a few things CNN didn’t publish.
The reason we are behind on our bills comes from the total wipeout of our savings this year due various unforseen circumstances we did plan correctly for. 600.00 was what we spend in total for our families last year. OUR FAMILIES… that’s 17 people we bought for.
And that was last year, not this year.
No, we are not millionaires, and yes we do realize there are people who are in worse circumstances than we are. CNN contacted me simply because of my IReport I posted. Did you read that?
Anyway, I wanted to personally clarify a few things for you before you began lambasting me again.
Thanks.
This story caught my eye today too and I ended making a blog post about the comments being left. Personally when I use the term “presents” I’m talking about everything I purchase for the kids at Christmas which includes clothes, toothbrushes etc.
I think reader’s missed the point of the article. After all if the Peterson’s would have spend half as much on their daughter last year would they be financially stable now? No. The article was about how job losses are affecting the holidays.
Your article is very well written by the way:)
While it may not apply to this particular situation (as it seems the CNN article may have been misleading) I recently was involved in a debate over similar issues.
Several self-described leftists were crying foul and blaming President Bush for number of poor people in the country. They were crying that it was the right who was responsible for the newest round of job losses and layoffs.
Of course, those on the right had a completely different viewpoint..
The discussion mutated, as they tend to do, into a discussion of what “poor” really means and how American poor compare to the poor in other nations.
The one thing that really stuck with me about the debate was the sense of entitlement that many people feel.
One only had one desktop and one laptop computer for 3 kids, they had to get rid of premium cable and they had to get rid of the data plan on the 10yr old daughter’s iPhone.
One was contemplating selling the 22″ chrome wheels on the Escalade, using the money to pay the phone bill and go on vacation.
I could only shake my head and wonder. How many of the poor in our nation have designer shoes, designer jeans, multiple cell phones, HBO, fancy nails, money for booze and drugs and the urge to whelp yet another child, but they don’t have money to pay on the credit cards.
Somehow that is the fault of ‘the system’ and not our society’s focus on what is really necessary. I mean, we can’t very well blame it on the poor.
All these attempts to define “the poor” remind me of an old Russian-Jewish saying: “Everybody’s got troubles. Some people’s soup is too watery; other people’s diamonds are too small.”
Since I’m one of those brats who like stuff (luckily, I’m an avid bargain hunter, and only want stuff if I’m getting something worthwhile for pennies on a dollar), I am fully qualified to point out that a toothbrush can under no circumstances, no matter the financial situation, be considered a present.
Also, an iPhone without a data plan is about as useful as a hammer.
Annette,
I think I was pretty clear in my first comment above, on my own post, that I wrote my post before I read any comment by you and having not read your i-report. I was basing it on CNN, the “most trusted name in news.” That’s what I’ve been assured by James Earl Jones.
I think it is reasonable to expect that when CNN reports that someone spent $600 on presents, in the context of an article about people feeling guilty about not being able to buy presents and people having to scale back holiday shopping, that the CNN story would be referring to presents, and not to basic supplies. Also, the CNN article specifically said, as I quoted, that you spent $600 on gifts for your daughter. I don’t know why any reader would interpret that “gifts” includes toothbrushes and basic necessities, as Christy mentions above , or that it is for 17 people when the article says “for their daughter.”
So, anyway, in my first comment above, I clearly retracted my statements having to do with you and your family specifically, after reading your statement, in CNN’s comment section, that CNN misrepresented the situation. If I wasn’t clear enough in doing it the first time, I hope I am now: I retract my comments having to do with the Petersons. I take you at your word that CNN misrepresented you. That misrepresentation, though, is a pretty bad one, directly contradicting what you are saying. So I would say that your issue is with CNN and its failure to accurately report your circumstances.
By the way, I hope things work out okay for you. My real point isn’t about you. The story about you exemplifies something that I think is a problem. It turns out that the story was not accurate (thanks, CNN), but I don’t think that makes it less of a problem.
Scott,
I appreciate that. I have contacted CNN but as you said “the most trusted name in news” sometimes is slow about corrections.
More than anything, I hope people realize that the article said that there will be no gifts, because we aren’t buying them. We are concentrating on paying our bills and getting caught up from a year of finanical and appliance problems.
I would much rather be able to buy my daugther dinner and watch a movie than worry about going out and spending money on a toy she’s probably going to toss aside and just play with the box.
I appreciate your candidness. It’s been a weird day. I received numerous phone calls, some good, some bad and some just downright rude.
Thank you again.
Annette
I appreciate the fact that Annette states that her story was misreported. So Annette aside, I agree that this is a huge problem. I work with people who have stated things just like what CNN was reporting. This was a couple of years ago, and they were not saying that they were behind on their bills. It was just a discussion about how much they spend on their kids for the holidays. I know how much these people make, and I hear their regular complaints about money problems. And yet spending $500+ per kid didn’t seem out of whack to them.
Look, I know everyone has his own priorities. If a person wants to allocate a huge sum of money to present buying because it makes him happy, I guess that’s his prerogative. I think that it is not doing the kid any favors, though. Preacher’s comments about spoiled kids were right on the mark. The sense of entitlement out there is absolutely amazing, and there is no real mystery about how it is being bestowed.
Yeah, CNN! The bastion of accurate reporting.
Whatever a “bastion” is.
Anyway, sure - a lot of people - sorry - “leftists” might blame Bush for the financial mess, and I’m being kind here, the country has found itself in.
Blame whatever you want on who you want, but ask yourself a simple question, just three words:
“Who’s in charge?”
Oh wait, you say - it’s far more complicated than that? I’m sure if you look hard enough we can somehow blame Thomas Jefferson.
Excuses are far easier to come by than solutions, huh?
Preacher - by the way - don’t try to pretend you had a conversation with someone who owns an Escalade with chrome wheels. They’re rims, by the way. The wheels are the rubber parts that help grip the road, unless you actually mean chrome wheels, which I’ve never heard of and seem like they would spark a lot, or something, and probably wear down fast and make you spin out sometimes.
Any you cannot cancel the data plan on an iPhone… without being a total idiot. Maybe you need to choose your discussionmates more carefully?