Michelle Singletary - WAPO finance expert has three failure to launch kids in their 20's living at home - RENT FREE

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What? No, her kids work FT in good careers. The fact that they want to live at home makes me think she’s a good mom! She always gave me a good vibe of being the kind of parent who somehow manages to hold her kids to high standards but have a warm relationship at the same time.

NP—yeah this is not “failure to launch”. Failure to launch is no school, no training, unemployed, still living at home.

This is just someone who gets along well enough with her adult kids to let them live at home in order to avoid them paying out the a*s for rent. And the kids get along well enough with their parents to take them up on that offer.

The kids are probably spending their paychecks on hotels or airBNBs on the weekends so they can party like grown people vs living in mom and dad's house.

[Anonymous]

And so what if they are? Still probably costs less than rent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What? No, her kids work FT in good careers. The fact that they want to live at home makes me think she’s a good mom! She always gave me a good vibe of being the kind of parent who somehow manages to hold her kids to high standards but have a warm relationship at the same time.

NP—yeah this is not “failure to launch”. Failure to launch is no school, no training, unemployed, still living at home.

This is just someone who gets along well enough with her adult kids to let them live at home in order to avoid them paying out the a*s for rent. And the kids get along well enough with their parents to take them up on that offer.

The kids are probably spending their paychecks on hotels or airBNBs on the weekends so they can party like grown people vs living in mom and dad's house.

We have different definitions of "party like grown people". Party like grown people in my house means to go out, have fun, drink/eat/dance/go to a concert, then take an Uber home.

Partying like a drunk frat boy is not what grown people do.

My 22 year old lives above our detached garage. He works full time, is finishing college with zero debt, and has a healthy savings account. He's light years ahead of where I was at 22. He can stay as long as is comfortable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are people on DCUM always so worked up about what other people are doing with their lives?

This topic is about someone who gives other people financial advice for a living, but doesn't take her own advice.

The financial advice to save on rent is sound.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are people on DCUM always so worked up about what other people are doing with their lives?

This topic is about someone who gives other people financial advice for a living, but doesn't take her own advice.

The financial advice to save on rent is sound.

+1 and is aligned to Michelle’s normal advice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think there are cultural differences at play here as well—I bet OP is white.

In a high cost of living area like DC it makes sense. As long as everyone gets along, why not?

Race has nothing to do with it. It’s an American thing, not a white thing. I have friends from places like France, Italy and Belgium and they all had adult children living with them. It is considered completely normal in those countries.

[Anonymous]

I agree it is not failure to launch and it is financially savvy, but it is a little weird. Seems like an extension of helicopter/overbearing parenting. Doesn’t even one of those kids *want* some independence? To have experiences of living with roommates, taking care of your own place, having friends over, having relationships where the SO can spend the night? Or is life just about earning money and socking it away?

Personally if I really wanted to encourage retirement savings, in lieu of this arrangement I would rather work out a deal with my kids where they send me proof of their contributions to retirement accounts and I transfer the same amount to them.

[Anonymous]

As long as the kids are working and saving money rather than blowing it, it makes good financial sense to live at home. In fact, that’s how smart people avoid debt and build a wealth. Why not live at home until you find a partner?

[Anonymous]

I have no issue with this: her kids are financially savvy.

I do wonder about local life coaches/parenting coaches with kids with rather pronounced issues…

[Anonymous]

I know very few single adult college grads who are DC metro natives and actually rent. Makes more sense to stay at home and repurpose that basement for a while, until you can build up savings. The rent is too high.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree it is not failure to launch and it is financially savvy, but it is a little weird. Seems like an extension of helicopter/overbearing parenting. Doesn’t even one of those kids *want* some independence? To have experiences of living with roommates, taking care of your own place, having friends over, having relationships where the SO can spend the night? Or is life just about earning money and socking it away?

Personally if I really wanted to encourage retirement savings, in lieu of this arrangement I would rather work out a deal with my kids where they send me proof of their contributions to retirement accounts and I transfer the same amount to them.

My adult kid lives at home and their SO regularly spends the night--it's not like they have no privacy just because they live in our house. They also cook for themselves, go to work, take care of the house, do their own shopping and laundry. But to send them money would cost us a lot more than just letting them live at home.

[Anonymous]

I don’t get why this is shocking? A financial expert’s children are saving a ton of money through her help — isn’t that what you’d expect a financial advisor to recommend?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there are cultural differences at play here as well—I bet OP is white.

+1
Such a Karen.

+2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still like her advice. I’m ok with her kids living at home.

It seems opposite to her advice for raising independent children. Advice for thee, not me.

She’s a financial advice columnist, not a parenting coach. And her children are saving serious amounts of money on rent. I guess you’d rather have your kids rent fancy apartments and eat avocado toast in the name of independence LOL.

+1 I have read sooooo many DCUM posts asking how people can afford $1M houses in their early 30s. Well, I lived with multiple roommates until I got married in my early 30s. My husband lived at home between finishing his PhD and our wedding 4 years later. We didn’t get $100k for a down payment, but 4 years of free rent is also a significant gift.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree it is not failure to launch and it is financially savvy, but it is a little weird. Seems like an extension of helicopter/overbearing parenting. Doesn’t even one of those kids *want* some independence? To have experiences of living with roommates, taking care of your own place, having friends over, having relationships where the SO can spend the night? Or is life just about earning money and socking it away?

Personally if I really wanted to encourage retirement savings, in lieu of this arrangement I would rather work out a deal with my kids where they send me proof of their contributions to retirement accounts and I transfer the same amount to them.

Oh please, living at home for a few years while single, after college, in no way means someone is obsessively hoarding money. Those early years are notoriously difficult financially because of a combination of relatively low entry-level salaries and high “start-up” life expenses:

1). You only have to save an emergency fund once in your life — unfortunately, that comes at the beginning of your working career (though, of course, you’ll increase the amount as your salary increases).

2). You basically only have to save for a car once in your life, again at the beginning of your working career. Of course, in subsequent years, you have to save an amount equal to the depreciation since cars eventually have to be replaced, but that’s much different than saving for the large initial purchase.

3). You only have to save a large down payment for a house once in your life, again at the beginning of your working career. You can then just keep rolling that into future purchases to keep your housing costs affordable for the rest of your life. Imagine a young person easily putting down 30% on a $600K purchase when they do eventually need to get into the expensive DC-area real estate market!

4). Same deal with furniture, again a large, one-time expense at the beginning of your working life. Sure, fashions change and eventually people may upgrade, but that’s not a necessity in the same way a bed and a couch are if you have none. You have obviously never been to a young couple’s new house that remains unfurnished for two years because they spent all their money just getting into the house.

5). Imagine being able to contribute large amounts to your 401(k) from day one. Maybe you consider that needlessly “earning money and socking it away,” but go and play around with a compound interest calculator online if you don’t understand the benefit of doing that.

Finally, imagine if young people lived at home until they got married, say from age 22 to 29. Even if they made only $75,000 a year and paid $15,000 in taxes, they might be able to save something close to 100% of the remaining $60,000. Over the course of seven years, that’s $420,000, enough to do all of the things listed above. How much easier would that make the rest of your life!