laplongejr t1_jackcd6 wrote on February 28, 2023 at 1:43 PM

Reply to comment by Csherman92 in TIFU by giving away a seat that wasn’t mine. by tomfoolery77

>That sounds like a personal problem.

Their point is that as long the kid is fine, it is NOT a problem for the parent, but for whoever ends next to the child if he misbehaves. The airline is saying "if you don't pay, we'll force you to put your misbehaving child somewhere we won't let you control him"... but "parent has to handle the child" is a benefit for everybody in the airplane which is NOT the child of the parent, so it's everything BUT a personal problem.

Basically if you pay the airline, you can still end next to the child of somebody who didn't pay extra. It's the "reverse protection" system that you can also see with Certificate Authorities : you pay to provide an advantage to another party, yet it is advertised as receiving said advantage. It only works if EVERYBODY pays extra, else nobody gets the benefit of having no misbehaving child.

Csherman92 t1_jad21x8 wrote on February 28, 2023 at 3:50 PM

It's selfish and entitled. Poor planning on her planning doesn't constitute and emergency on anyone else. That's the point.

I hate entitled people, and this is the definition of it.

laplongejr t1_jad4jpl wrote on February 28, 2023 at 4:06 PM

> It's selfish and entitled.

Yeah, sure.

> Poor planning on her planning doesn't constitute and emergency on anyone else. That's the point.

Except that in this case, the situation from the airline creates an emergency for everybody else but the bad parent. It literally punishes good parents and rewards bad parenting.

> I hate entitled people, and this is the definition of it.

Yeah and the airline asks extra payment for parents who don't feel entitled. We always go back to the airline for considering that normal.