While it is my opinion that the classes are well prepared and for the most part are informative and up-to-date I feel that some are contradictive of practice principles and are just as offensive as the obvious. To identify Source of Income as a factor in financial approval for mortgage or rental requirements as identified by federal regulations is recognized and understood without stigmatizing. Additionally stated someone should not be categorized with limitations as to potential buying power due to income as they may have won the lottery or inherited money, one of your questions in Real Estate Ethics and Professional Standards. It is most apparent that clients should not be stereotyped with respect to those issues yet, it is okay to stereotype someone as "affluent," because they happen to own "a vacation home." Is one not just as offensive as the other??? Maybe that person also won the lottery, or inherited money or just plain out worked hard and saved for such. Same ol same ol, double standard. Source of Income can not be identified as available for the poor, good fortunate can knock at anyone's door and hard work and sacrifice is to be assumed as "affluent". This is just as insulting and I doubt would be offensive to those you have labeled as. Should the person buying a $900,000 home as opposed to a $350,000 home be judged or labeled in any manner? Truth be told which sale would the agent rather make? I dare say the $900,000 sale, oh would that be considered a sale to the "affluent?" Maybe no label should be used. I found it offensive and in professional standards and conduct would never refer to any client as such.