Who here is regularly supporting their adult children financially?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are now paying daycare expenses for our first grandchild. My daughter carries their health insurance and her husband has 2 kids from a previous marriage that he has to pay child support for.

I'm not happy about it but I'm not sure what to do about it.

Do you mean like, you feel you can’t say no or you disagree with your spouse about it?

Well, the kids can't afford it. And they can't afford for one of them to stay home. I guess I'm angry that they didn't think this through and just figured it will all work out. And of course, it has. Mom and dad have solved the problem. She's 27 and he's 37. It's easy to say that we shouldn't pay daycare but then what? They make too much money to qualify for daycare vouchers but not enough to pay the monthly fee.

Um, I couldn't afford it either when I had my first kid at 28....guess what I did? I figured it out. The kid gets what he/she needs first and we get what what's left over....at 27/37 you should not be enabling this. Seriously.

PP here...btw....my parents didn't pay one dime towards my college education. I did all of it myself and although it took me 6 years I still did it. The more enabling you do, the more helplessness you encourage. I get it's hard but it's always going to be hard...throughout your life. I'm 50 and sometimes it's still hard but I don't ask my parents (they're not here anymore but even when they were I didn't) for a dime). There were sometimes in my marriage when daycare was more than my mortgage. Those were tough years but you pull it together and get through it.

My child is nowhere near the age to be on his own but posts like this make no sense at all. You suffered so everyone should?

If I have the means, and I can help my child out, I will. Period. Now PP is clearly doing it begrudgingly and I understand why, but people like you just annoy me. I paid for my own college too, but I also got lucky in a lot of respects. I'm not pushing unnecessary hardship on my kid to prove some stupid point.

DP here, but PP, you really aren't helping your child by constantly being there for them. They have to develop the skills in life to survive, and create a life of their own. I get if there are health issues, but you not wanting your child to struggle like you did is the very reason we are raising kids who don't know how to make it in life. And that creates entitlement and lack of self-worth.

This is also an attitude that results in zero generational wealth. Your belief that a hard life is required for self-worth may mean your grandkids won't be able to afford college or grad school or buy a home. It means that if they get really sick, they'll be burdened by medical bills and may not be able to make rent. Having a safety net for your kids and grandkids isn't creating entitlement, it means that they can live healthy, productive lives free of crushing debt.

This

I can only repeat that I specifically mention health issues would be considered differently. I really don't understand how people can't read.

It's not just health issues, though, it could be that the car breaks down and needs replacement, or daycare costs $2K/month/child and your DD will have to mommy-track or quit her job to care for her children, or the basement floods and the bill is $20K, etc., etc. These are hardly frivolous expenses, but they are expenses that can really burden a young family and set them back.
I've noticed that a lot colleagues who are really able to succeed in their careers and in their family life are people who have family supporting them. They have parents who are happy to take the kids when a parent has to fly out of town for a work conference, or to take the family on vacations for some much-needed down time, or help with that downpayment on a condo so their kids can start building equity.
I'm not saying it's impossible; DH and I have done well for ourselves despite the lack of family help, both monetary and otherwise. But it has been unnecessarily stessful.

Folks, do what you want with your money. However, don't credit your kids' success to really anything they have done on their own when you are paying for everything. I have yet to actually meet any of the "successful" people referenced above that get massive parental welfare. It is weird when you reference the various life events above as somehow so hard for young families...did you receive a ton of $$$s from your parents for all these things?

The few I know live comfortable lives, but don't have high-powered careers, nor are any of them the type willing to start a company or really take any life/career risks. Of course, their comfortable lives are directly related to still getting allowances as adults.

Again, it's fine. I mean, nobody thinks it is weird when scions of the Disney or Johnson&Johnson families transfer hundreds millions or even billions to their kids. I guess if you have so much money that you are struggling with what to do with it, then it seems more acceptable/rational to create elaborate trusts and other tax schemes to preserve it.

You seem a bit sheltered and likely don't know many people who do have much parental financial help. I know many successful adults who had parental "assistance" because the parents have money. I know some in high-powered careers and others in careers they love that typically don't pay as much (Social Work, teaching, etc) but are essential to our society surviving. Also know some who take career risks/start a company. They are able to choose all of these more easily because they know there is a fall back. Much easier to be a Social worker or therapist when you know your income doesn't matter, so you can do what you are great at and love. You can start a small business in an area of interest because you have the seed money, and the ability to live well while/until the business takes off.

So, you basically hang around with lots of parent welfare recipients? That's weird. Sounds like you are a parent welfare recipient yourself.

Give me an example of this "high-powered career"? You do realize that 99% of social workers and teachers don't live on parent welfare, right?

I think you are also inventing the truly successful small business (vs. a lifestyle business) that somehow succeeds because of parent welfare. I mean, that's every great business story, right? Google was only founded because Sergei and Larry received generous parent stipends (oh wait, that didn't happen). I remember those scenes from the Social Network (oops maybe that's the director's cut).

“Parent welfare“?? Someone is very jealous and resentful that there are people out there who have families with money. yes, some people have to work hard to get where they are and other people have a little help.

It doesn’t make them bad people.

No, but it does often make them quite boring. There is a continuum here, and those on the most entitled end often don't seem like full fledged adults. Case in point, the lack of self awareness of the $700K income poster getting the $18K annual gift.

People can certainly do what they want, but it does have an effect whether you are dirt poor or filthy rich, lack of or abundance of money changes you. Acting like the latter can be neutral is silly.

What's the lack of self awareness? I think they're fully aware of their finances and their gifts, in fact, recounted it quite well.

FWIW, I find it hilarious that you're suggesting that someone making 700K isn't a full fledged adult because you predict that they would be in debt but-for their 18K annual gift from their parents, which is like 2.5% of their annual income.

Does money change people? Not really, you see poor people spending their 100M winnings frivolously because they never learned how to have money. But even if it did, I highly doubt that this 18K gift changed anything about PP because they likely grew up rich and without want of money anyways.

You are making a baseless assumption - no one ever said they'd be in debt. They are just moronically tone deaf when they say that gift allows them to take a nice vacation. It sounds very infantilized for someone at that income level. I'm not the only one who picked up on that. I'm not against parental help in some form, but if my kid made $700K I'd put my $18K into someone else's pocket who could really use it. Different strokes.

They would have taken 4 vacations a year with a 700K HHI but now they take 5 with the extra 18K.

This^^^

Plus if the parents are wealthy, why shouldn't they give some of the wealth to their kids/grandkids? Who is to say they are not already "giving a lot into someone else's pocket who could really use it"?

Why does it matter if one kid makes a lot of money? They chose a lucrative career and they deserve it just as much and my other child who chose an honorable, less lucrative career. Both kids are very thankful and it brings us joy to be equitable and see the money benefits both of them.

Weird way to get joy. Why would it give you joy to give a kid that maybe is worth more than you, just more money?

Hopefully that sibling either donates it or gives it to the other sibling. That is literally what I told my parents…giving me thousands of dollars is a rounding error…give more to a sibling that needs it.

[Anonymous]

My kids will never live just on their income alone thanks to a generation skipping trust. We have never lived on just our own income either although my husband worked hard.

[Anonymous]

My sibling who's almost 30 lives at home and is being supported by my parents, who are both still working full-time despite being past retirement age. Sibling is currently unemployed and has never worked a full-time job despite having a relatively employable degree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most people I know in their late 20s and early 30s (I am 31) got their parents to either cosign mortgages in the last few years or provide the down payment. The majority of these people have graduate or professional degrees, are working and are married or engaged. This was especially true if they had a baby. The grandparents seem to be horrified by the idea that their grandchild would live in a rental townhouse.

My siblings and I are in our thirties. We all bought homes without parental help. Frankly, we didn't need it. Our parents paid for 100% of our education and bought us our first car (one of my siblings is still driving hers), and we all got graduate + level degrees and started our careers making very good money with no debt. It did not take long to save for a down payment. We also waited to have children until our early thirties, and we all married people with similar work ethic. There is so much entitlement on this board. It is antithetical to how I was raised. I am grateful that I got a free education and would never expect my parents to chip in on a down payment or fund my portion of a family vacation.

And I would never expect my parents to buy my first car nor pay 100% of my education. Everyone has different views on what counts as entitlement--seemingly usually tied to whatever their parents did for them being the "right" amount and everything more than that excessive...

+1 Mostly has to do with your income level and what happened for yourself at that age.
We pay for college, first car, setting up the first apartment with furniture (deposit), etc. Have funded/matched their Roth IRA since first job in HS and continue to give them the Roth amount plus another $10K for 401K. They are 2 years out of college, saving a ton (yes, I know they can because of us, but they'd be saving even if we didn't help, just less). We will pay for any wedding (if/when), help with downpayment for a home (when ready) and help fund the grandkids education (and our kid's grad degrees if they choose to go back). That seems like a lot for many people.
For us, it's just logical. Rather than them getting millions when we die in 30+ years, why not gift it when it will most benefit them (20s/30s). As long as they are not lazy, ungrateful brats we will continue to do that. And by that I mean, they need to have a 40 hour/week job and living within their means. If they want to rent a 3 bedroom apartment when they are single or rent a huge luxury home with 3+ bedroom or buy a 100K car, then they will be signaling that they don't need any assistance (we don't spend that much on cars and we are wealthy). So far, so good. They work hard at their job, try to be frugal and actively save and don't waste money. They are appreciative of the money we give them and it hasn't derailed them from becoming successful adults.

Sounds like you attach a lot of strings…this in my experience is the problem. Next you will meddle in their school
Choices for their kids, which house they buy (sounds like you that already), etc.

Of course their sucking at the teet which is what you want so you can continue to control them.

Nope, not too many strings. I don't think requiring your kids to have a career/be contributing to society a string. We don't care what they do, but they shouldn't be sitting at home playing video games all day and no job. We also don't want them to spend it on extreme luxury items---at this point they are in their 20s. So yes, if they decide to purchase a $100K+ vehicle, we might wind back how much we send.
We want them to thrive in life and be fully functioning adults, and they are. They largely use our contributions to Save, Save, Save and they have a great job that they are dedicated to and doing great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most people I know in their late 20s and early 30s (I am 31) got their parents to either cosign mortgages in the last few years or provide the down payment. The majority of these people have graduate or professional degrees, are working and are married or engaged. This was especially true if they had a baby. The grandparents seem to be horrified by the idea that their grandchild would live in a rental townhouse.

My siblings and I are in our thirties. We all bought homes without parental help. Frankly, we didn't need it. Our parents paid for 100% of our education and bought us our first car (one of my siblings is still driving hers), and we all got graduate + level degrees and started our careers making very good money with no debt. It did not take long to save for a down payment. We also waited to have children until our early thirties, and we all married people with similar work ethic. There is so much entitlement on this board. It is antithetical to how I was raised. I am grateful that I got a free education and would never expect my parents to chip in on a down payment or fund my portion of a family vacation.

And I would never expect my parents to buy my first car nor pay 100% of my education. Everyone has different views on what counts as entitlement--seemingly usually tied to whatever their parents did for them being the "right" amount and everything more than that excessive...

+1 Mostly has to do with your income level and what happened for yourself at that age.
We pay for college, first car, setting up the first apartment with furniture (deposit), etc. Have funded/matched their Roth IRA since first job in HS and continue to give them the Roth amount plus another $10K for 401K. They are 2 years out of college, saving a ton (yes, I know they can because of us, but they'd be saving even if we didn't help, just less). We will pay for any wedding (if/when), help with downpayment for a home (when ready) and help fund the grandkids education (and our kid's grad degrees if they choose to go back). That seems like a lot for many people.
For us, it's just logical. Rather than them getting millions when we die in 30+ years, why not gift it when it will most benefit them (20s/30s). As long as they are not lazy, ungrateful brats we will continue to do that. And by that I mean, they need to have a 40 hour/week job and living within their means. If they want to rent a 3 bedroom apartment when they are single or rent a huge luxury home with 3+ bedroom or buy a 100K car, then they will be signaling that they don't need any assistance (we don't spend that much on cars and we are wealthy). So far, so good. They work hard at their job, try to be frugal and actively save and don't waste money. They are appreciative of the money we give them and it hasn't derailed them from becoming successful adults.

Sounds like you attach a lot of strings…this in my experience is the problem. Next you will meddle in their school
Choices for their kids, which house they buy (sounds like you that already), etc.

Of course their sucking at the teet which is what you want so you can continue to control them.

Nope, not too many strings. I don't think requiring your kids to have a career/be contributing to society a string. We don't care what they do, but they shouldn't be sitting at home playing video games all day and no job. We also don't want them to spend it on extreme luxury items---at this point they are in their 20s. So yes, if they decide to purchase a $100K+ vehicle, we might wind back how much we send.
We want them to thrive in life and be fully functioning adults, and they are. They largely use our contributions to Save, Save, Save and they have a great job that they are dedicated to and doing great.

You can lie to yourself all you want...but you keep mentioning strings. It's a gift, right? I mean, if they are actually doing well on their own...it's found money. Why can't they indulge?

Or perhaps...they aren't doing all that well and need the money. No shame in admitting that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most people I know in their late 20s and early 30s (I am 31) got their parents to either cosign mortgages in the last few years or provide the down payment. The majority of these people have graduate or professional degrees, are working and are married or engaged. This was especially true if they had a baby. The grandparents seem to be horrified by the idea that their grandchild would live in a rental townhouse.

My siblings and I are in our thirties. We all bought homes without parental help. Frankly, we didn't need it. Our parents paid for 100% of our education and bought us our first car (one of my siblings is still driving hers), and we all got graduate + level degrees and started our careers making very good money with no debt. It did not take long to save for a down payment. We also waited to have children until our early thirties, and we all married people with similar work ethic. There is so much entitlement on this board. It is antithetical to how I was raised. I am grateful that I got a free education and would never expect my parents to chip in on a down payment or fund my portion of a family vacation.

And I would never expect my parents to buy my first car nor pay 100% of my education. Everyone has different views on what counts as entitlement--seemingly usually tied to whatever their parents did for them being the "right" amount and everything more than that excessive...

+1 Mostly has to do with your income level and what happened for yourself at that age.
We pay for college, first car, setting up the first apartment with furniture (deposit), etc. Have funded/matched their Roth IRA since first job in HS and continue to give them the Roth amount plus another $10K for 401K. They are 2 years out of college, saving a ton (yes, I know they can because of us, but they'd be saving even if we didn't help, just less). We will pay for any wedding (if/when), help with downpayment for a home (when ready) and help fund the grandkids education (and our kid's grad degrees if they choose to go back). That seems like a lot for many people.
For us, it's just logical. Rather than them getting millions when we die in 30+ years, why not gift it when it will most benefit them (20s/30s). As long as they are not lazy, ungrateful brats we will continue to do that. And by that I mean, they need to have a 40 hour/week job and living within their means. If they want to rent a 3 bedroom apartment when they are single or rent a huge luxury home with 3+ bedroom or buy a 100K car, then they will be signaling that they don't need any assistance (we don't spend that much on cars and we are wealthy). So far, so good. They work hard at their job, try to be frugal and actively save and don't waste money. They are appreciative of the money we give them and it hasn't derailed them from becoming successful adults.

Sounds like you attach a lot of strings…this in my experience is the problem. Next you will meddle in their school
Choices for their kids, which house they buy (sounds like you that already), etc.

Of course their sucking at the teet which is what you want so you can continue to control them.

Nope, not too many strings. I don't think requiring your kids to have a career/be contributing to society a string. We don't care what they do, but they shouldn't be sitting at home playing video games all day and no job. We also don't want them to spend it on extreme luxury items---at this point they are in their 20s. So yes, if they decide to purchase a $100K+ vehicle, we might wind back how much we send.
We want them to thrive in life and be fully functioning adults, and they are. They largely use our contributions to Save, Save, Save and they have a great job that they are dedicated to and doing great.

You can lie to yourself all you want...but you keep mentioning strings. It's a gift, right? I mean, if they are actually doing well on their own...it's found money. Why can't they indulge?

Or perhaps...they aren't doing all that well and need the money. No shame in admitting that.

My kid has a budget and can fully afford everything needed in life with their own income. They live in a nice 1 bedroom/1 bath apartment in one of the top suburbs in their area.
Only difference is they would save less overall and in their 401K if we didn't gift them $$. We feel we pay so much in taxes already, it's only logical we want our kids to maximize tax benefits and max out their 401K from an early age. Our kid literally saves saves saves. One drives a 10+ yo vehicle (we gave them) and plans to keep it another 4-5 years, unless there are any major issues. Because they know it's the financially savy thing to do.
We take our kids and their SO on family vacations. We plan them, attempt to do it when the kids can join if they want. If it doesn't work out, no harm, they just dont come. There are no edicts that they Must join us. We all live in different areas of the country, so it's a fun way to get together (outside of the holidays), rather than just sitting at home and being together. If you gotta fly to gather, might as well fly to someplace fun.

You quite frankly sound a bit jealous that you cannot afford to gift your kids $$. We are wealthy, and feel it's much better our kids benefit from the $$$ when it matters most, not when they are 50+ and we are dead.

[Anonymous]

I am proud to say that my kid got a fully funded offer to attend grad school. (That is the only kind of programs she applied to.) She is living on a small stipend from the school, but fully supporting herself.

That was the deal so I could retire.

(I did let her live here rent-free until she got into grad school—which took one year. She worked part-time during that period, for spending money. I also added her car to my car insurance, which is much cheaper than a standalone policy. But she pays her share of that bill.)

[Anonymous]

This topic is discussed also in the Adult Child forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most people I know in their late 20s and early 30s (I am 31) got their parents to either cosign mortgages in the last few years or provide the down payment. The majority of these people have graduate or professional degrees, are working and are married or engaged. This was especially true if they had a baby. The grandparents seem to be horrified by the idea that their grandchild would live in a rental townhouse.

My siblings and I are in our thirties. We all bought homes without parental help. Frankly, we didn't need it. Our parents paid for 100% of our education and bought us our first car (one of my siblings is still driving hers), and we all got graduate + level degrees and started our careers making very good money with no debt. It did not take long to save for a down payment. We also waited to have children until our early thirties, and we all married people with similar work ethic. There is so much entitlement on this board. It is antithetical to how I was raised. I am grateful that I got a free education and would never expect my parents to chip in on a down payment or fund my portion of a family vacation.

And I would never expect my parents to buy my first car nor pay 100% of my education. Everyone has different views on what counts as entitlement--seemingly usually tied to whatever their parents did for them being the "right" amount and everything more than that excessive...

+1 Mostly has to do with your income level and what happened for yourself at that age.
We pay for college, first car, setting up the first apartment with furniture (deposit), etc. Have funded/matched their Roth IRA since first job in HS and continue to give them the Roth amount plus another $10K for 401K. They are 2 years out of college, saving a ton (yes, I know they can because of us, but they'd be saving even if we didn't help, just less). We will pay for any wedding (if/when), help with downpayment for a home (when ready) and help fund the grandkids education (and our kid's grad degrees if they choose to go back). That seems like a lot for many people.
For us, it's just logical. Rather than them getting millions when we die in 30+ years, why not gift it when it will most benefit them (20s/30s). As long as they are not lazy, ungrateful brats we will continue to do that. And by that I mean, they need to have a 40 hour/week job and living within their means. If they want to rent a 3 bedroom apartment when they are single or rent a huge luxury home with 3+ bedroom or buy a 100K car, then they will be signaling that they don't need any assistance (we don't spend that much on cars and we are wealthy). So far, so good. They work hard at their job, try to be frugal and actively save and don't waste money. They are appreciative of the money we give them and it hasn't derailed them from becoming successful adults.

Sounds like you attach a lot of strings…this in my experience is the problem. Next you will meddle in their school
Choices for their kids, which house they buy (sounds like you that already), etc.

Of course their sucking at the teet which is what you want so you can continue to control them.

Nope, not too many strings. I don't think requiring your kids to have a career/be contributing to society a string. We don't care what they do, but they shouldn't be sitting at home playing video games all day and no job. We also don't want them to spend it on extreme luxury items---at this point they are in their 20s. So yes, if they decide to purchase a $100K+ vehicle, we might wind back how much we send.
We want them to thrive in life and be fully functioning adults, and they are. They largely use our contributions to Save, Save, Save and they have a great job that they are dedicated to and doing great.

You can lie to yourself all you want...but you keep mentioning strings. It's a gift, right? I mean, if they are actually doing well on their own...it's found money. Why can't they indulge?

Or perhaps...they aren't doing all that well and need the money. No shame in admitting that.

My kid has a budget and can fully afford everything needed in life with their own income. They live in a nice 1 bedroom/1 bath apartment in one of the top suburbs in their area.
Only difference is they would save less overall and in their 401K if we didn't gift them $$. We feel we pay so much in taxes already, it's only logical we want our kids to maximize tax benefits and max out their 401K from an early age. Our kid literally saves saves saves. One drives a 10+ yo vehicle (we gave them) and plans to keep it another 4-5 years, unless there are any major issues. Because they know it's the financially savy thing to do.
We take our kids and their SO on family vacations. We plan them, attempt to do it when the kids can join if they want. If it doesn't work out, no harm, they just dont come. There are no edicts that they Must join us. We all live in different areas of the country, so it's a fun way to get together (outside of the holidays), rather than just sitting at home and being together. If you gotta fly to gather, might as well fly to someplace fun.

You quite frankly sound a bit jealous that you cannot afford to gift your kids $$. We are wealthy, and feel it's much better our kids benefit from the $$$ when it matters most, not when they are 50+ and we are dead.

Not jealous at all. I actually have tons of money I could gift. It's funny how everyone likes to say "your just jealous"...maybe my kids are actually successful vs. fake successful like yours? However, this isn't about maximizing tax giving or anything else...this is you continuing to try to control your kids through money. I mean, if you are really so wealthy, then why does it matter if your kid uses your gift to buy a fancy car? You are really wealthy, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most people I know in their late 20s and early 30s (I am 31) got their parents to either cosign mortgages in the last few years or provide the down payment. The majority of these people have graduate or professional degrees, are working and are married or engaged. This was especially true if they had a baby. The grandparents seem to be horrified by the idea that their grandchild would live in a rental townhouse.

My siblings and I are in our thirties. We all bought homes without parental help. Frankly, we didn't need it. Our parents paid for 100% of our education and bought us our first car (one of my siblings is still driving hers), and we all got graduate + level degrees and started our careers making very good money with no debt. It did not take long to save for a down payment. We also waited to have children until our early thirties, and we all married people with similar work ethic. There is so much entitlement on this board. It is antithetical to how I was raised. I am grateful that I got a free education and would never expect my parents to chip in on a down payment or fund my portion of a family vacation.

And I would never expect my parents to buy my first car nor pay 100% of my education. Everyone has different views on what counts as entitlement--seemingly usually tied to whatever their parents did for them being the "right" amount and everything more than that excessive...

+1 Mostly has to do with your income level and what happened for yourself at that age.
We pay for college, first car, setting up the first apartment with furniture (deposit), etc. Have funded/matched their Roth IRA since first job in HS and continue to give them the Roth amount plus another $10K for 401K. They are 2 years out of college, saving a ton (yes, I know they can because of us, but they'd be saving even if we didn't help, just less). We will pay for any wedding (if/when), help with downpayment for a home (when ready) and help fund the grandkids education (and our kid's grad degrees if they choose to go back). That seems like a lot for many people.
For us, it's just logical. Rather than them getting millions when we die in 30+ years, why not gift it when it will most benefit them (20s/30s). As long as they are not lazy, ungrateful brats we will continue to do that. And by that I mean, they need to have a 40 hour/week job and living within their means. If they want to rent a 3 bedroom apartment when they are single or rent a huge luxury home with 3+ bedroom or buy a 100K car, then they will be signaling that they don't need any assistance (we don't spend that much on cars and we are wealthy). So far, so good. They work hard at their job, try to be frugal and actively save and don't waste money. They are appreciative of the money we give them and it hasn't derailed them from becoming successful adults.

Sounds like you attach a lot of strings…this in my experience is the problem. Next you will meddle in their school
Choices for their kids, which house they buy (sounds like you that already), etc.

Of course their sucking at the teet which is what you want so you can continue to control them.

Nope, not too many strings. I don't think requiring your kids to have a career/be contributing to society a string. We don't care what they do, but they shouldn't be sitting at home playing video games all day and no job. We also don't want them to spend it on extreme luxury items---at this point they are in their 20s. So yes, if they decide to purchase a $100K+ vehicle, we might wind back how much we send.
We want them to thrive in life and be fully functioning adults, and they are. They largely use our contributions to Save, Save, Save and they have a great job that they are dedicated to and doing great.

You can lie to yourself all you want...but you keep mentioning strings. It's a gift, right? I mean, if they are actually doing well on their own...it's found money. Why can't they indulge?

Or perhaps...they aren't doing all that well and need the money. No shame in admitting that.

My kid has a budget and can fully afford everything needed in life with their own income. They live in a nice 1 bedroom/1 bath apartment in one of the top suburbs in their area.
Only difference is they would save less overall and in their 401K if we didn't gift them $$. We feel we pay so much in taxes already, it's only logical we want our kids to maximize tax benefits and max out their 401K from an early age. Our kid literally saves saves saves. One drives a 10+ yo vehicle (we gave them) and plans to keep it another 4-5 years, unless there are any major issues. Because they know it's the financially savy thing to do.
We take our kids and their SO on family vacations. We plan them, attempt to do it when the kids can join if they want. If it doesn't work out, no harm, they just dont come. There are no edicts that they Must join us. We all live in different areas of the country, so it's a fun way to get together (outside of the holidays), rather than just sitting at home and being together. If you gotta fly to gather, might as well fly to someplace fun.

You quite frankly sound a bit jealous that you cannot afford to gift your kids $$. We are wealthy, and feel it's much better our kids benefit from the $$$ when it matters most, not when they are 50+ and we are dead.

Not jealous at all. I actually have tons of money I could gift. It's funny how everyone likes to say "your just jealous"...maybe my kids are actually successful vs. fake successful like yours? However, this isn't about maximizing tax giving or anything else...this is you continuing to try to control your kids through money. I mean, if you are really so wealthy, then why does it matter if your kid uses your gift to buy a fancy car? You are really wealthy, right?

Because we don't want our kids to be spoiled brats, at age 25 they don't need to be living life of luxury. Our jump from HNW to UHNW happened recently, so they definately did not grow up spoiled, as we have always lived well below our means. FYI===we are not really concerned they will blow the money, as I stated they are fiscally very frugal and focus on investing/saving.

Why would you call mine "fake success"? They are employed by a great company, in the top 10% of their team each year and advancing well in their career. They have fully launched as an adult and we are extremely proud of them.

[Anonymous]

I'm in my late forties and my parents have always helped me financially. I've always worked but have never made enough. They also help my sibling, who is very wealthy. They're able to and happy to do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm in my late forties and my parents have always helped me financially. I've always worked but have never made enough. They also help my sibling, who is very wealthy. They're able to and happy to do it.

Glad you are proud of your failure. Embarrassing that you are in your 40s and can’t exist as an independent adult.

They may give you welfare…but not sure that are bragging to their friends about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm in my late forties and my parents have always helped me financially. I've always worked but have never made enough. They also help my sibling, who is very wealthy. They're able to and happy to do it.

Glad you are proud of your failure. Embarrassing that you are in your 40s and can’t exist as an independent adult.

They may give you welfare…but not sure that are bragging to their friends about it.

Another rude response. Not every child is going to have an income higher than their parents did. The man works and his income is on the low side. That is not a failure. His parents are probably like the majority of parents and are plenty proud of their children. What is wrong with you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most people I know in their late 20s and early 30s (I am 31) got their parents to either cosign mortgages in the last few years or provide the down payment. The majority of these people have graduate or professional degrees, are working and are married or engaged. This was especially true if they had a baby. The grandparents seem to be horrified by the idea that their grandchild would live in a rental townhouse.

My siblings and I are in our thirties. We all bought homes without parental help. Frankly, we didn't need it. Our parents paid for 100% of our education and bought us our first car (one of my siblings is still driving hers), and we all got graduate + level degrees and started our careers making very good money with no debt. It did not take long to save for a down payment. We also waited to have children until our early thirties, and we all married people with similar work ethic. There is so much entitlement on this board. It is antithetical to how I was raised. I am grateful that I got a free education and would never expect my parents to chip in on a down payment or fund my portion of a family vacation.

And I would never expect my parents to buy my first car nor pay 100% of my education. Everyone has different views on what counts as entitlement--seemingly usually tied to whatever their parents did for them being the "right" amount and everything more than that excessive...

+1 Mostly has to do with your income level and what happened for yourself at that age.
We pay for college, first car, setting up the first apartment with furniture (deposit), etc. Have funded/matched their Roth IRA since first job in HS and continue to give them the Roth amount plus another $10K for 401K. They are 2 years out of college, saving a ton (yes, I know they can because of us, but they'd be saving even if we didn't help, just less). We will pay for any wedding (if/when), help with downpayment for a home (when ready) and help fund the grandkids education (and our kid's grad degrees if they choose to go back). That seems like a lot for many people.
For us, it's just logical. Rather than them getting millions when we die in 30+ years, why not gift it when it will most benefit them (20s/30s). As long as they are not lazy, ungrateful brats we will continue to do that. And by that I mean, they need to have a 40 hour/week job and living within their means. If they want to rent a 3 bedroom apartment when they are single or rent a huge luxury home with 3+ bedroom or buy a 100K car, then they will be signaling that they don't need any assistance (we don't spend that much on cars and we are wealthy). So far, so good. They work hard at their job, try to be frugal and actively save and don't waste money. They are appreciative of the money we give them and it hasn't derailed them from becoming successful adults.

Sounds like you attach a lot of strings…this in my experience is the problem. Next you will meddle in their school
Choices for their kids, which house they buy (sounds like you that already), etc.

Of course their sucking at the teet which is what you want so you can continue to control them.

Nope, not too many strings. I don't think requiring your kids to have a career/be contributing to society a string. We don't care what they do, but they shouldn't be sitting at home playing video games all day and no job. We also don't want them to spend it on extreme luxury items---at this point they are in their 20s. So yes, if they decide to purchase a $100K+ vehicle, we might wind back how much we send.
We want them to thrive in life and be fully functioning adults, and they are. They largely use our contributions to Save, Save, Save and they have a great job that they are dedicated to and doing great.

You can lie to yourself all you want...but you keep mentioning strings. It's a gift, right? I mean, if they are actually doing well on their own...it's found money. Why can't they indulge?

Or perhaps...they aren't doing all that well and need the money. No shame in admitting that.

My kid has a budget and can fully afford everything needed in life with their own income. They live in a nice 1 bedroom/1 bath apartment in one of the top suburbs in their area.
Only difference is they would save less overall and in their 401K if we didn't gift them $$. We feel we pay so much in taxes already, it's only logical we want our kids to maximize tax benefits and max out their 401K from an early age. Our kid literally saves saves saves. One drives a 10+ yo vehicle (we gave them) and plans to keep it another 4-5 years, unless there are any major issues. Because they know it's the financially savy thing to do.
We take our kids and their SO on family vacations. We plan them, attempt to do it when the kids can join if they want. If it doesn't work out, no harm, they just dont come. There are no edicts that they Must join us. We all live in different areas of the country, so it's a fun way to get together (outside of the holidays), rather than just sitting at home and being together. If you gotta fly to gather, might as well fly to someplace fun.

You quite frankly sound a bit jealous that you cannot afford to gift your kids $$. We are wealthy, and feel it's much better our kids benefit from the $$$ when it matters most, not when they are 50+ and we are dead.

Not jealous at all. I actually have tons of money I could gift. It's funny how everyone likes to say "your just jealous"...maybe my kids are actually successful vs. fake successful like yours? However, this isn't about maximizing tax giving or anything else...this is you continuing to try to control your kids through money. I mean, if you are really so wealthy, then why does it matter if your kid uses your gift to buy a fancy car? You are really wealthy, right?

Because we don't want our kids to be spoiled brats, at age 25 they don't need to be living life of luxury. Our jump from HNW to UHNW happened recently, so they definately did not grow up spoiled, as we have always lived well below our means. FYI===we are not really concerned they will blow the money, as I stated they are fiscally very frugal and focus on investing/saving.

Why would you call mine "fake success"? They are employed by a great company, in the top 10% of their team each year and advancing well in their career. They have fully launched as an adult and we are extremely proud of them.

Your adult children are in the top 10% of their teams? At work? I bet you were one of those insufferable parents who always announced your child’s GPA, top percent in school, best athletes in their school. You should be proud but they are adults stop bragging unless they do something worthwhile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm in my late forties and my parents have always helped me financially. I've always worked but have never made enough. They also help my sibling, who is very wealthy. They're able to and happy to do it.

Glad you are proud of your failure. Embarrassing that you are in your 40s and can’t exist as an independent adult.

They may give you welfare…but not sure that are bragging to their friends about it.

Another rude response. Not every child is going to have an income higher than their parents did. The man works and his income is on the low side. That is not a failure. His parents are probably like the majority of parents and are plenty proud of their children. What is wrong with you.

This isn’t having more income than your parents…it’s not even self-sufficient.

Maybe don’t brag on DCUM that you still need an allowance.