“Family money” becoming more important in dating

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OTOH, I think it's really messed up when the low earning spouse gets a large inheritance and chooses to keep it as her personal property, then divorces and claims she needs alimony to maintain her standard of living. In that situation, "family money" should be a factor in the divorce settlement.

Must have been illiquid. Your message makes no sense from an estate or divorce law perspective.

Alimony is based on forgone day job earnings to prop up the earning spouse, kids and household.

It makes perfect sense. Inheritance is not part of the marital estate.

I think it makes sense though that she still gets alimony bc women usually lose a lot more in marriage and divorce than men do. Their youth is much more valuable and they are not the same marriage material as a divorced with kids, and since marriage is still the road to stability for most women, it really matters a lot. It’s why most older divorced women are poor.

Is having a kid a necessity to not be poor?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would be upset if my kids decided to marry too far down. I don't want them to make their life unnecessarily difficult. I plan will give my kids a substantial downpayment, help with childcare, college tuition for grandkids, and leave an inheritance. I hope that their in-laws can contribute as well.

You are my parents. DH’s parents have nothing for retirement and are a financial burden, as is one of his siblings. It wipes out our income discrepancies after you net out his outflows. My parents have also had to be more strategic about gifting and estate planning - their goal was never ever to effectively transfer to another family. Instead of cash gifts, they buy things we don't need but are nice to have, spoil my kids, pay for vacations, have a generation skipping trust that takes the burden off leaving a big estate myself, and I'm the one who owns and manages their 529 plans.

Sounds like your parents really have contempt for your in-laws. A generation skipping trust is far from the optimal way to solve your alleged problem.

They want to take care of their grandkids since their daughter married below her SES. They are solving a problem and protecting the innocent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would be upset if my kids decided to marry too far down. I don't want them to make their life unnecessarily difficult. I plan will give my kids a substantial downpayment, help with childcare, college tuition for grandkids, and leave an inheritance. I hope that their in-laws can contribute as well.

You are my parents. DH’s parents have nothing for retirement and are a financial burden, as is one of his siblings. It wipes out our income discrepancies after you net out his outflows. My parents have also had to be more strategic about gifting and estate planning - their goal was never ever to effectively transfer to another family. Instead of cash gifts, they buy things we don't need but are nice to have, spoil my kids, pay for vacations, have a generation skipping trust that takes the burden off leaving a big estate myself, and I'm the one who owns and manages their 529 plans.

Sounds like your parents really have contempt for your in-laws. A generation skipping trust is far from the optimal way to solve your alleged problem.

You think a spouse’s parents should take care of their daughter or son-in-law’s parents? That's a first. Or that wealthy grandparents are not going to want to help their grandkids with college or other things if they can? The bottom line is that people who work hard and obtain some level of wealth, they usually want to keep it in the family. If you ever get to that level of wealth through hard work and risk, you’ll understand. A spouse by marriage is not entitled to family money. Some people are nice and give them gifts, but that is above and beyond what anyone should expect.

As stated by another poster, encourage your kids to marry someone with a similar background.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I have heard my kids talk about money. We are 1st gen immigrant. Came with nothing. No generational wealth in this country, no support system. We are now UMC and have always been white collar.

My gen-Z kids are super aware about money. And they are very grateful of what we have been able to provide them, even if we are not super wealthy. My kids do behave like starving artists. They do not have expensive taste. But they don't stand out because none of their friends have expensive tastes either.

I think, the way America is declining - their generation may be the generation that will want their parents hoarded stuff.

Rich and intelligent families have always passed down things and property to kids and created generational wealth.

Low IQ and frivolent spenders never had much anything of value to pass on because they squandered it.

This makes no sense. People from generational wealth don’t have the same economic pressures as others. They don’t have to worry about retirement, saving for college, saving for housing, and so forth.

You’re are dripping with disdain for people less wealthy, however they are the ones who do honest work and the honest juggling of bills and finances every month. Not you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would be upset if my kids decided to marry too far down. I don't want them to make their life unnecessarily difficult. I plan will give my kids a substantial downpayment, help with childcare, college tuition for grandkids, and leave an inheritance. I hope that their in-laws can contribute as well.

You are my parents. DH’s parents have nothing for retirement and are a financial burden, as is one of his siblings. It wipes out our income discrepancies after you net out his outflows. My parents have also had to be more strategic about gifting and estate planning - their goal was never ever to effectively transfer to another family. Instead of cash gifts, they buy things we don't need but are nice to have, spoil my kids, pay for vacations, have a generation skipping trust that takes the burden off leaving a big estate myself, and I'm the one who owns and manages their 529 plans.

Sounds like your parents really have contempt for your in-laws. A generation skipping trust is far from the optimal way to solve your alleged problem.

They want to take care of their grandkids since their daughter married below her SES. They are solving a problem and protecting the innocent.

Too bad these parents have trained their own DD to rely on them to come swooping to the rescue.

It seems as if she is not capable of taking care of their own children even.

This is the problem of marrying into an upper SES usually. Kids have been raised to believe they can always fall onto their parents instead of standing on their own feet.

Give me a scrappy poor immigrant any day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I have heard my kids talk about money. We are 1st gen immigrant. Came with nothing. No generational wealth in this country, no support system. We are now UMC and have always been white collar.

My gen-Z kids are super aware about money. And they are very grateful of what we have been able to provide them, even if we are not super wealthy. My kids do behave like starving artists. They do not have expensive taste. But they don't stand out because none of their friends have expensive tastes either.

I think, the way America is declining - their generation may be the generation that will want their parents hoarded stuff.

Rich and intelligent families have always passed down things and property to kids and created generational wealth.

Low IQ and frivolent spenders never had much anything of value to pass on because they squandered it.

This makes no sense. People from generational wealth don’t have the same economic pressures as others. They don’t have to worry about retirement, saving for college, saving for housing, and so forth.

You’re are dripping with disdain for people less wealthy, however they are the ones who do honest work and the honest juggling of bills and finances every month. Not you.

I think the disdain is generally directed toward people who marry for money and feel entitled to family money that isn’t theirs. No one faults hard-working people doing honest work; it’s the gold diggers who marry our son or daughter for access to our money that we don’t like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I have heard my kids talk about money. We are 1st gen immigrant. Came with nothing. No generational wealth in this country, no support system. We are now UMC and have always been white collar.

My gen-Z kids are super aware about money. And they are very grateful of what we have been able to provide them, even if we are not super wealthy. My kids do behave like starving artists. They do not have expensive taste. But they don't stand out because none of their friends have expensive tastes either.

I think, the way America is declining - their generation may be the generation that will want their parents hoarded stuff.

Rich and intelligent families have always passed down things and property to kids and created generational wealth.

Low IQ and frivolent spenders never had much anything of value to pass on because they squandered it.

This makes no sense. People from generational wealth don’t have the same economic pressures as others. They don’t have to worry about retirement, saving for college, saving for housing, and so forth.

You’re are dripping with disdain for people less wealthy, however they are the ones who do honest work and the honest juggling of bills and finances every month. Not you.

I think the disdain is generally directed toward people who marry for money and feel entitled to family money that isn’t theirs. No one faults hard-working people doing honest work; it’s the gold diggers who marry our son or daughter for access to our money that we don’t like.

And they are all after your kids" money?

Your children would have no attraction if they didn't have wealth?

Sad

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I have heard my kids talk about money. We are 1st gen immigrant. Came with nothing. No generational wealth in this country, no support system. We are now UMC and have always been white collar.

My gen-Z kids are super aware about money. And they are very grateful of what we have been able to provide them, even if we are not super wealthy. My kids do behave like starving artists. They do not have expensive taste. But they don't stand out because none of their friends have expensive tastes either.

I think, the way America is declining - their generation may be the generation that will want their parents hoarded stuff.

Rich and intelligent families have always passed down things and property to kids and created generational wealth.

Low IQ and frivolent spenders never had much anything of value to pass on because they squandered it.

This makes no sense. People from generational wealth don’t have the same economic pressures as others. They don’t have to worry about retirement, saving for college, saving for housing, and so forth.

You’re are dripping with disdain for people less wealthy, however they are the ones who do honest work and the honest juggling of bills and finances every month. Not you.

I think the disdain is generally directed toward people who marry for money and feel entitled to family money that isn’t theirs. No one faults hard-working people doing honest work; it’s the gold diggers who marry our son or daughter for access to our money that we don’t like.

And they are all after your kids" money?

Your children would have no attraction if they didn't have wealth?

Sad

Nah, but we have safeguards in place just in case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OTOH, I think it's really messed up when the low earning spouse gets a large inheritance and chooses to keep it as her personal property, then divorces and claims she needs alimony to maintain her standard of living. In that situation, "family money" should be a factor in the divorce settlement.

Must have been illiquid. Your message makes no sense from an estate or divorce law perspective.

Alimony is based on forgone day job earnings to prop up the earning spouse, kids and household.

It makes perfect sense. Inheritance is not part of the marital estate.

I think it makes sense though that she still gets alimony bc women usually lose a lot more in marriage and divorce than men do. Their youth is much more valuable and they are not the same marriage material as a divorced with kids, and since marriage is still the road to stability for most women, it really matters a lot. It’s why most older divorced women are poor.

I agree. We both agree that it is NOT “messed up that ex wives and mothers get alimony” ever. And that inheritance is not factored in.

[Anonymous]

Trusts protect adult kids and grand kids from bad divorce situations.
They also protect said kids from second and third family drama and loss of financials.

What’s the word everyone needs in their revocable and irrevocable trusts? Mutual descendants only.

[Anonymous]

I ain't sayin she a gold-digger...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trusts protect adult kids and grand kids from bad divorce situations.
They also protect said kids from second and third family drama and loss of financials.

What’s the word everyone needs in their revocable and irrevocable trusts? Mutual descendants only.

Spendthrift trusts can also protect the next generation from their spendthrift parents, or they can protect a direct descendant from their spendthrift spouse.

This is how 99% of trusts work. Posts like OP's are because some uneducated people think they are entitled to another family's money by marriage, which is just not the case and never will be. Think about it from the perspective of the person who earned the money and set up the trust.

[Anonymous]

I come from a family of wealth, and my DH comes from the MC family. I met him at the University of Michigan where he attended on an athletic scholarship. He is tall, good-looking, and has good character. We got married after graduation, and I used my family wealth to support his professional dream for three years, and we traveled all over the world. He gave up his dream, and had a real job in the government after that. I would rather be with my DH than marry someone who does not have good character, because money is not everything, especially when I already have money. YMMV.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trusts protect adult kids and grand kids from bad divorce situations.
They also protect said kids from second and third family drama and loss of financials.

What’s the word everyone needs in their revocable and irrevocable trusts? Mutual descendants only.

Spendthrift trusts can also protect the next generation from their spendthrift parents, or they can protect a direct descendant from their spendthrift spouse.

This is how 99% of trusts work. Posts like OP's are because some uneducated people think they are entitled to another family's money by marriage, which is just not the case and never will be. Think about it from the perspective of the person who earned the money and set up the trust.

I think a marriage into a family like yours: the husband and wife need to realize they will never be the only two people in that marriage.

Not everyone is attracted to that kind of arrangement, especially when you are talking about high earning individuals themselves.

Go in eyes wide open.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trusts protect adult kids and grand kids from bad divorce situations.
They also protect said kids from second and third family drama and loss of financials.

What’s the word everyone needs in their revocable and irrevocable trusts? Mutual descendants only.

Spendthrift trusts can also protect the next generation from their spendthrift parents, or they can protect a direct descendant from their spendthrift spouse.

This is how 99% of trusts work. Posts like OP's are because some uneducated people think they are entitled to another family's money by marriage, which is just not the case and never will be. Think about it from the perspective of the person who earned the money and set up the trust.

I think a marriage into a family like yours: the husband and wife need to realize they will never be the only two people in that marriage.

Not everyone is attracted to that kind of arrangement, especially when you are talking about high earning individuals themselves.

Go in eyes wide open.

Not really. A spendthrift trust generates a certain amount of income that the beneficiary can spend as they choose. They may not be able to spend down the principal or lose it in a divorce, but if the beneficiary wants to spend their annual benefit on buying their husband a new car, they usually can.

I suppose if you don't want free money you could always give your share to another family member or your favorite charity.