Anyone here grow up wealthy or well off but have not surpassed parents/grandparents/GG Parents wealth or earnings?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For folks building generational wealth for their children, how do you define generation wealth , what is the threshold per child that they may be inheriting or in lifestyle subsidies/extras over time? Is it $1M or $5M per child you are thinking?

I think it has to be at least $10 million per child as inheritance plus paying for wedding, downpayment, private schools, college, childcare and private schools for grandkids. I say that because that's pretty much what I get/got (no inheritance yet but it will be more than that), along with a lot of my friends in a similar situation. I'd say you're still wealthy at lower levels but it wouldn't be generational wealth because it's hard to pass less than down through many generations.

As for me, I will not earn more than my parents but I work a public service job that is meaningful and interesting to me. I don't spend that much but I live in a row house in DC so I can walk to work, don't have loans, and my parents pay for schooling. My husband works in a similar public service job. A lot of my friends are in the same position but we don't really talk about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For folks building generational wealth for their children, how do you define generation wealth , what is the threshold per child that they may be inheriting or in lifestyle subsidies/extras over time? Is it $1M or $5M per child you are thinking?

I think it has to be at least $10 million per child as inheritance plus paying for wedding, downpayment, private schools, college, childcare and private schools for grandkids. I say that because that's pretty much what I get/got (no inheritance yet but it will be more than that), along with a lot of my friends in a similar situation. I'd say you're still wealthy at lower levels but it wouldn't be generational wealth because it's hard to pass less than down through many generations.

As for me, I will not earn more than my parents but I work a public service job that is meaningful and interesting to me. I don't spend that much but I live in a row house in DC so I can walk to work, don't have loans, and my parents pay for schooling. My husband works in a similar public service job. A lot of my friends are in the same position but we don't really talk about it.

I define generational wealth as enough wealth that even if you have a kid that never works and spends tons of $$$s...the principal is basically still there and even growing.

Now sure, you can leave your kid $500MM and they can turn around and purchase a super yacht for $450MM and blow the rest..so there is always something crazy to lose it all.

But let's just assume it's your normal prolifregate spender with their country club, 5 star vacations, etc. On this basis, it's probably somewhere $50MM+, with the principal throwing off $2.5MM per year of dividends and interest.

[Anonymous]

We had a UMC lifestyle but I didn’t realize my parents lived well below their means. They both grew up middle class and they were aggressive savers. They now live and travel very comfortably plus they are incredibly generous. We live comfortably too but I can’t imagine amassing the amount of wealth they have though I don’t know how much they have but I’d guess it’s $50 million+. We are doing just fine on our own so I have no complaints.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For folks building generational wealth for their children, how do you define generation wealth , what is the threshold per child that they may be inheriting or in lifestyle subsidies/extras over time? Is it $1M or $5M per child you are thinking?

I think it has to be at least $10 million per child as inheritance plus paying for wedding, downpayment, private schools, college, childcare and private schools for grandkids. I say that because that's pretty much what I get/got (no inheritance yet but it will be more than that), along with a lot of my friends in a similar situation. I'd say you're still wealthy at lower levels but it wouldn't be generational wealth because it's hard to pass less than down through many generations.

As for me, I will not earn more than my parents but I work a public service job that is meaningful and interesting to me. I don't spend that much but I live in a row house in DC so I can walk to work, don't have loans, and my parents pay for schooling. My husband works in a similar public service job. A lot of my friends are in the same position but we don't really talk about it.

Will your kids have the same set-up? Is a chunk also saved for grandchildren and all subsequent generations? Just curious.

[Anonymous]

Yes. My dad had to help us with down payment for a house. He is also paying for our kids tennis and dance. He also pays for our summer vacations. We have a take a home of $220k. My dad makes about $300k/year in passive income at 70 and has a few paid off real estate properties.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yep. I grew up UMC. I’m … bordering on middle class as an adult. That’s just how life works out sometimes.

I would guess remaining in UMC is harder. We can argue where there is a such thing as middle class anyways because a lot of people in UMC are just a few catastrophic events away from falling into middle class..And when you are middle class you are just temporarily not poor.

[Anonymous]

I came here as an international student 20 years ago and stayed. I should have gone back to my country in Africa. My dad is a millionaire. I grew up rich. My dad is in real estate. Now in fairness a lot of his wealth came from lucky investments in land and rentals in the late 90s. Some of my friends who went back are doing very well much better than their parents....of well

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For folks building generational wealth for their children, how do you define generation wealth , what is the threshold per child that they may be inheriting or in lifestyle subsidies/extras over time? Is it $1M or $5M per child you are thinking?

I think it has to be at least $10 million per child as inheritance plus paying for wedding, downpayment, private schools, college, childcare and private schools for grandkids. I say that because that's pretty much what I get/got (no inheritance yet but it will be more than that), along with a lot of my friends in a similar situation. I'd say you're still wealthy at lower levels but it wouldn't be generational wealth because it's hard to pass less than down through many generations.

As for me, I will not earn more than my parents but I work a public service job that is meaningful and interesting to me. I don't spend that much but I live in a row house in DC so I can walk to work, don't have loans, and my parents pay for schooling. My husband works in a similar public service job. A lot of my friends are in the same position but we don't really talk about it.

Will your kids have the same set-up? Is a chunk also saved for grandchildren and all subsequent generations? Just curious.

Yes, I don’t spend all that much and my children also have a trust.

[Anonymous]

Lots of people here are defining generational wealth down, probably to avoid thinking too hard about how many advantages their lives had simply because of what family they were born into.

My grandparents left me and all of my siblings and cousins several hundred thousand dollars each, my parents paid for all of my Ivy League college degree, and they gave me about half of the deposit I put down on my first home. My parents are also likely to leave my siblings and me somewhere between $2 and $5 million one day.

I consider that absolutely to be generational wealth — it has given me far more resources than most people have and enabled me to choose a career that, while lucrative, earns far less than if I’d gone into something like finance or corporate law, which I could have done but just … didn’t want to. And yet I still have plenty of money available for paying for my own kids to go to college one day and for living in the neighborhood I wanted to.

You can pretend generational wealth only refers to people who never have to work, but I think that just hand-waves past all the benefits people like me get from wealthy but not 1 percent families.

[Anonymous]

Don’t disagree with your post…but most wealth is gone within 3 generations which is due to heirs squandering it.

The wealth that survives many generations is sufficient to even survive the squanderers…again within reason.

Hard to survive an heir buying a private island or superyacht or jet or anything where you blow $100MM+ in one fell swoop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Uh, yeah, probably the majority of all such people have not surpassed their parents. Haven't you heard that we're the first generation not to do better than our parents? That applies to all income brackets.

Neither me nor my three siblings have even matched our dad's income—and he only made like $250K/year, not millions. However, one sister is married to a high-earner and the other is dating a high-earmer (~$400K). Sucks that women can marry their way into wealth but men have to earn it.

Men can also marry into it. I know 5+ couples where the woman is the higher earner.

Then why does every single, high-earning woman in the relationship forum say that marriage would only make sense if their potential partner earns as much or more than they do?

Perhaps this attitude is part of the reason why they are single??

I make more than double what DH makes. Having an attitude like that would have robbed me of a wonderful, loving husband and a very happy life.

[Anonymous]

Nope. I surpassed my grandparents' earnings with my summer jobs, and surpassed my parents earnings with my first job out of law school.

My kids will have a harder time surpassing our earnings though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lots of people here are defining generational wealth down, probably to avoid thinking too hard about how many advantages their lives had simply because of what family they were born into.

My grandparents left me and all of my siblings and cousins several hundred thousand dollars each, my parents paid for all of my Ivy League college degree, and they gave me about half of the deposit I put down on my first home. My parents are also likely to leave my siblings and me somewhere between $2 and $5 million one day.

I consider that absolutely to be generational wealth — it has given me far more resources than most people have and enabled me to choose a career that, while lucrative, earns far less than if I’d gone into something like finance or corporate law, which I could have done but just … didn’t want to. And yet I still have plenty of money available for paying for my own kids to go to college one day and for living in the neighborhood I wanted to.

You can pretend generational wealth only refers to people who never have to work, but I think that just hand-waves past all the benefits people like me get from wealthy but not 1 percent families.

Excellent description! It definately allows your kids to choose careers that they love, not just ones that make "enough money". And knowing that your grandkids education is paid for, also allows your kid(s) and their partner(s) to have extra money to spend on other things in life (vacations, activities,e tc) because they don't have to save $1K/month/kid for college for 18+ years

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Uh, yeah, probably the majority of all such people have not surpassed their parents. Haven't you heard that we're the first generation not to do better than our parents? That applies to all income brackets.

Neither me nor my three siblings have even matched our dad's income—and he only made like $250K/year, not millions. However, one sister is married to a high-earner and the other is dating a high-earmer (~$400K). Sucks that women can marry their way into wealth but men have to earn it.

Men can also marry into it. I know 5+ couples where the woman is the higher earner.

Then why does every single, high-earning woman in the relationship forum say that marriage would only make sense if their potential partner earns as much or more than they do?

Perhaps this attitude is part of the reason why they are single??

I make more than double what DH makes. Having an attitude like that would have robbed me of a wonderful, loving husband and a very happy life.

+1

Having an attitude like that and/or having a DH/male partner who feels threatened by a spouse who makes significantly more is not healthy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nope. I surpassed my grandparents' earnings with my summer jobs, and surpassed my parents earnings with my first job out of law school.

My kids will have a harder time surpassing our earnings though.

+1

Doubt our kids will surpass our earnings. We were UHNW by 45, no family help at all. Kids are smart and motivated, but they also see a value to work/life balance and don't care to routinely work a job that requires 60hr+/week. They do well and have great careers, but definitely have a better Work-life balance. And that is fine, because they know they can have a great life and not make $1M/year