NYT: 30 somethings still being bankrolled by their parents

[Anonymous]

I’m a sahm in Bethesda. Many women who grew up here have grandparents paying for all school tuitions and camps. Grandparents funded CC memberships too. They also take fully-funded family vacations. College and weddings were paid in full and downpayment money is often provided too. It sounds wonderful. And from the grandparents perspective, they’re subsidizing the cost of living to keep all their kids in a very expensive area. Otherwise, they’d be moving out to Frederick... or husbands would be tempted to take jobs in other cities.

As a transplant on a budget it can be hard to connect sometimes but I’ve found most appreciate my honesty. “That looks like an amazing opportunity, Jill! Thanks for sharing with me. We can’t afford to pay $10k for camp though.”

[Anonymous]

I know several families who live very well but every vacation is to the grandparents vacation home (were going to FL/Skiing, etc) or somewhere with the Grandparents who are clearly paying.

Now, it’s not awful to go to these places or spend time with grandparents but interesting that they can’t find their own vacation.

As others have stated, it seems obnoxious when people say we’re going to “our home” in FL/CO etc, when really, it’s your parents home!

I’ve also known people who stay in friends’ vacation homes for instance an hour away from Naples FL and pass it off as they are vacationing IN Naples, on their own. Or the time a friend said they were taking their mother on a cruise and later at a play date her son said “grandma is treating us to a cruise!”.

You just never know...and the weird hiding of give-outs is rampant.

[Anonymous]

Can’t “fund” their own vacation

[Anonymous]

I have a friend who worked at a luxury car dealer - a surprising number of parents buy cars for their adult children

I used to work in a wealth industry - many UMC parents heavily subsidize their children’s lifestyles (pay for country club memberships, school, car, home, etc) because they want their children to portray a certain amount of success.

[Anonymous]

PP wealth industry - meant to add that I think this sort of luxury lifestyle subsidy is very different than one generation helping the next in ways that are reasonable and sustainable for the next generation.

[Anonymous]

One bit of research that may provide some solace (or inspiration to plan well)...by the 3rd generation, 90% of wealth generated by the first family is gone.

There is much research to support this and I’ve seen it myself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a friend who worked at a luxury car dealer - a surprising number of parents buy cars for their adult children

I used to work in a wealth industry - many UMC parents heavily subsidize their children’s lifestyles (pay for country club memberships, school, car, home, etc) because they want their children to portray a certain amount of success.

This isn't it at all. Likely there are several things going on.

1. They are worried that if they don't have some of those things that they will be tempted to move away to cheaper areas.

2. they have the money

3. They would rather give the money to family than the tax man at the time of their death

4. they would rather be living and watching their kids enjoy the money rather than getting a pile of cash when they are dead

5. They probably think that if they buy some of those things the kids can prioritize savings for their kids in a way they wouldn't otherwise be able to do and therefore continue the cycle for their grandkids

6. Human nature - they want to get things for their kids that make them happy.

7. Things like private school tuition are extremely tax efficient.

This is it - maybe not the whole list but this is how we will do things when the time comes and will have an up front conversation about why we are doing them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a friend who worked at a luxury car dealer - a surprising number of parents buy cars for their adult children

I used to work in a wealth industry - many UMC parents heavily subsidize their children’s lifestyles (pay for country club memberships, school, car, home, etc) because they want their children to portray a certain amount of success.

This isn't it at all. Likely there are several things going on.

1. They are worried that if they don't have some of those things that they will be tempted to move away to cheaper areas.

2. they have the money

3. They would rather give the money to family than the tax man at the time of their death

4. they would rather be living and watching their kids enjoy the money rather than getting a pile of cash when they are dead

5. They probably think that if they buy some of those things the kids can prioritize savings for their kids in a way they wouldn't otherwise be able to do and therefore continue the cycle for their grandkids

6. Human nature - they want to get things for their kids that make them happy.

7. Things like private school tuition are extremely tax efficient.

This is it - maybe not the whole list but this is how we will do things when the time comes and will have an up front conversation about why we are doing them.

DP, and all these reasons can be true, AND many wealthy parents care deeply that their kids appear successful, even when they could never maintain that lifestyle on their own. "This isn't it at all"; how do you know? Have you surveyed all wealthy parents?

[Anonymous]

OP is there any difference between this and people who inherit $$$ from their parents once they die?

I personally don't see a real difference except in timing, and the realization that getting the money earlier in life rather than later actually means more because people can start building wealth when they don't worry about mortgage or student loans.

I mean, these people are lucky who have parents who can support them. I myself received nothing from my parents once I hit 18 and was in college, and will not inherit anything from them except for a few trinkets/sentimental tschotkes - they have a very modest nest egg and whatever little that remains once they are gone should go to my sibling who needs it more than me.

On the other hand, we might inherit maybe 100k+ from my MIL, if she doesn't have to spend all her savings on a nursing home. Which might happen, so even that's not a given and I'm not making plans with it. She did give us about 60k spread over 8 years when we were in our 40s, which was helpful for house renovations, and my brother-in-law gave 10k to each of my kids when they were born for their college funds. So no complaints there.

[Anonymous]

The difference between “getting inheritance now” and when your parents/ILs actually die is;
Funeral expenses,
Nursing homes,
End of life care,
Renovations so they can “age in place”,
Medical expenses,
Home health aides,
Maids, etc.

Only a stupid, entitled, child would assume that A parent’s money is theirs. Don’t take what isn’t yours under the guise of “eventually.” It’s immature and presumptuous.

[Anonymous]

‘Are’

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Never got or wanted a cent from my parents. Navigated myself to plenty of money. I have to admit I feel superior and stronger than friends who were subsidized. I can't see Clint Eastwood or James Bond going to Mommy and Daddy as adults for sustenance. It's not sexy.

This is true for me, as well. I have to admit that I do judge people who have received substantial help from parents. You know, the people whose house or car or vacations or credit card debt are paid for by their parents. There IS something 'weak' about them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I grew up poor and black (gen Xer, not millenial). I was able to get into college and then law school. I paid for both with loans. My husband is comes from a UMC white family and didn't have loans because his parents paid. He works hard and so do I. We paid for our own wedding and the down payment on our house ourselves. Both of his parents are still alive but have resources because they worked hard and because they inherited sums of money when their parents passed. Meanwhile, I pay my mother's pharmacy co-pays, any new clothes she needs, her phone and cable bill, newspaper and magazine subscriptions and all of her luxuries in life. This is the story of this country. His family continues to benefit from wealth inherited for generations while there is none in my side of the family.

You are a great daughter.

[Anonymous]

If my parents could buy me a whole entire house, I could deal with you thinking I was weak. I’d be good with that. So very good with it.

Add a car and some yearly cash gifts and you could hang out on my sidewalk and taunt me every morning - Id happily wave as I go buy. Maybe chuck a donut out to you because I could afford it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Never got or wanted a cent from my parents. Navigated myself to plenty of money. I have to admit I feel superior and stronger than friends who were subsidized. I can't see Clint Eastwood or James Bond going to Mommy and Daddy as adults for sustenance. It's not sexy.

This is true for me, as well. I have to admit that I do judge people who have received substantial help from parents. You know, the people whose house or car or vacations or credit card debt are paid for by their parents. There IS something 'weak' about them.

LOL

You must be fun at parties