Romeo Beckham gets £45 grand for a days work.

[Pollyteacakes]

How much does this family need. Burberry have paid 12 year old Romeo £45.000 for one days work modeling. I don't wear Burberry myself but if I did that would probably put me off ever buying it again. How far will this family go for publicity and money. Small change to them though. But isn't there something wrong when a 12 year old gets in one day what it might take most of us a year or two to earn?

Again seeing what you want to see. I've not loved or defended them.

Tbh I'm still stuck on that fact that you read - at least Romeo will pay more in tax

And translate that as - we should lower the national minimum wage

£5 grand a tenth of true couture? Is VBs not of the same quality then ?

Wtf are you even on about OP? You seem to have some chip on your shoulder that you keep coming close to exposing and then stop yourself. What is the actual issue? Are you an underdog who has felt unsupported by MN or the general public?

Alicelidi .....You're wrong, my post is about inequalities and the injustice between the rich and the poor.

I'm not wrong. Your first post is almost entirely about the Beckhams, with no reference whatsoever to inequality or injustice or examples.

1. Title of thread - Romeo Beckham gets 45 grand for a days work? - is entirely about him and the money he was paid and says nothing about general inequality or injustice or examples.

1. First line of your post - How much does this family need. - is entirely about the Beckham family and says nothing about inequality or injustice or examples.

1. Second line of your post - Burberry have paid 12 year old Romeo £45.000 for one days work modelling. - is all about Romeo Beckham and how much Burberry have paid him, says nothing about inequality or injustice or examples.

1. Third line of your post - I don't wear Burberry myself but if I did that would probably put me off ever buying it again. - discusses your fashion choices, says nothing about inequality or injustice or examples.

1. Fourth line of your post - How far will this family go for publicity and money. - is entirely about the Beckham family, says nothing about inequality or injustice or examples.

1. Fifth line of your post - Small change to them though. - is entirely about how much money the Beckham family have, says nothing about inequality or injustice or examples.

1. Sixth line of your post - But isn't there something wrong when a 12 year old gets in one day what it might take most of us a year or two to earn? - is the only one that touches on inequality or injustice, still references Romeo Beckham in particular. Still didn't say you were only using them as an example rather than attacking them personally.

I used the Beckhams as an example.

But you did not say so.

Nowhere in your first post did you say you were using the Beckhams as an example of inequality, which is why you came across as making a personal attack on them and their son solely because you were jealous or feeling hard done by because they are already rich and their son has just been paid a large amount of money.

I can't help it if you decide to misinterpret and nitpick over my post.

I can't help it if you were not as clear about your point as you thought you were. I didn't misinterpret it, because you didn't say it. I wasn't nitpicking before. I am now.

Imo it was a perfect analogy of what is wrong with the world.

You are entitled to your opinion that you said everything perfectly clearly. That doesn't mean you did. Because you didn't.

Maybe vb isn't looking so bad now you know she is the primark of the designer world

I expect everyone having a pop at VB is sitting in the nuddy.

So it is designer clothing or nothing?

All clothing is designer, having been designed by a clothes designer and all that.

I suspect my clothes were designed by a blind bat.

Wow Alice you've gone to a lot of trouble there! it seems like every statement I've made has been nit picked and examined under a microscope.
So many of your assumptions are wrong and so simplistic.
For example....when I said that "I don't wear Burberry myself but if I did I wouldn't now".....that has absolutely nothing to do with my fashion choices, it's about the policy of a company that will throw £45 grand at a child. Just because it happens to be clothes is irrelevant.
I didn't need to state in my posts that I was using the Beckhams purely as an example, it should have been pretty obvious.
Of course I used Romeo as an example, he was in the news yesterday.
When I say, how much does this family need, of course I'll say that.if I want to use as an example what I see wrong in the world.
I really don't understand what the problem is here, it's like we should all be like robots and think and say wonderful gushing things about celebrities.
Posts on here are too easily misconstrued, my whole point is the obscenity of paying thousands to a 12 year old for a days work. That is the injustice.

Slithy......I said we should raise the national minimum wage.

There is no moral high ground when it comes to fashion.

Who said otherwise?

Well actually there is People Tree, Traid labels etc..

It's pretty clear that your original post wasn't about paying 45K to 'a 12 year old' it was about paying 45K to THAT 12 year old.

How are you going to explain away your comments about VB not working hard, hmmm?

Your posts haven't been misconstrued.

You looked to slag off two well known slebs for their parental decisions and expected a pat on the back and validation.

what I dont get about this thread is the people who know so much about this family, even when they've never met them and never will

Can't believe this thread is still going.

Have you admitted defeat yet OP?

He's probably lined up his next £45,000 by now.

I meant traid as in the generic term for aid though trade.

I've been at work all day so not participated in any Mumsnet threads at all.

I think OP has a perfectly valid point about Romeo. Way too much money, he's too young to be a model, his family certainly give the impression of being all about the cash - which I just find hideous, especially in a family already so ostentatious.

I certainly won't be dissing VB though. She's done great. But you don't see her on enormous advertising billboards with her legs apart wearing just a pair of knickers, do you?

It was no trouble at all OP.

But what you meant wasn't obvious, because you didn't say what you meant.

I'm not sure why you are having so much difficulty in understanding this.

If you want people to understand what you mean, say what you mean. Don't make some pretty specific statements about a particular family, leave out your point and then expect everyone to understand you.

Your OP came across as petty and jealous because you didn't make your point, you just spent most of it saying "the Beckhams this, the Beckhams that" and didn't say any of the things you are now claiming your post was all about.

To take your last post, you did say this: "when I said that "I don't wear Burberry myself but if I did I wouldn't now" but you did not say this "it's about the policy of a company that will throw £45 grand at a child."

Yet now you say it was obvious. It wasn't, not when you missed half your point out but expected everyone to guess it.

"I didn't need to state in my posts that I was using the Beckhams purely as an example, it should have been pretty obvious."

But it wasn't obvious. Your first post was very focused on the Beckhams and as such it came across as being very personally against them rather than a general complaint with them being used as an example.

"Of course I used Romeo as an example, he was in the news yesterday."

Again, you didn't say anything to make this clear. Nothing about "just seen Romeo Beckham in the news, AIBU to think this is an example of the inequality between rich and poor." Instead it was all "how much money do one family want…" So again, personal against them rather than general example

"When I say, how much does this family need, of course I'll say that.if I want to use as an example what I see wrong in the world.'

This is still very focused against the Beckhams without mentioning why they are an example of what you are talking about. You are asking "how much do they need" rather than saying "Burberry paying this is an example of how unequal earnings are". So still not saying what you now claim you meant.

"I really don't understand what the problem is here, it's like we should all be like robots and think and say wonderful gushing things about celebrities."

Not so. You were not clear, your point wasn't specified, and you came across badly.

Now you are annoyed because you think everyone should have just known all the things you didn't actually say. I'm not overly fussed about celebrities. Apparently I was rude to Russell Brand yesterday.

"Posts on here are too easily misconstrued"

It would help to prevent that if you were more clear in your OP.

"my whole point is the obscenity of paying thousands to a 12 year old for a days work. That is the injustice."

And you've finally made that point clearly now, in a way that doesn't come across as being personal towards one particular child or family.

Which is all I said when I first replied, the way you came across in your first post was very focused on this particular family because you think they have a lot of money and don't like the fact they've got a bit more and not because you think their is an inequality in the rich/poor divide.

Jesus Alice obsessed- much.

Op I'll be more succinct- yanbu.

Gosh, I see some people are really extraordinarily over-invested in this .