Not many fans of giving to charity on DCUM lol

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your husband sounds like a d*ck. Basically, like the kind of guy who derives a lot of self-pride from having done well, and now doesn’t want to help others. I get not wanting your kids to be lazy or entitled. But wtf was the point of making all that money? To leave it to some bs charity that will forget him 6 months after he’s gone? Good grief. Tell him to set up an education trust or something like that. That way the kids and grandkids still have to work and be productive to get anything.

OP here. Honestly, you're the one who sounds like a d*ck. Besides setting our kids up for success with private schools and universities, we have helped disadvantaged kids through his non-profit...you have no idea. I don't know where you are getting this impression other than the fact that you are jealous of our success and generosity. Your tone, is frankly, over the top and bordering on unhinged.

I'm with PP here. My inlaws are doing the same thing. And they are leaving a boatload more than your husband--think ten figures--all to charity. They put some money in trusts for their kids, which the kids now have, and it's helpful, but not life changing. And all the rest is going to charity and a foundation so they can secure their "legacy." It's actually laughable, because nobody will remember who they are a year after they are gone. Those charities do not care who they are. Those who do don't even like them, but act like they do because of their money. Why people care about their "legacies" when they'll be dead is beyond me. My legacy is my children and if I could leave them some security, then that's what I would do. My in-laws, on the other hand, are leaving them nothing.

Hey that's your choice. And the more I hear from some people on this thread who are on the side of greed, the more I realize maybe DH is onto something.

NP. It’s not greed to want financial security for your children.

DP. How do you define financial security. Her kids will graduate with a private school education; undergraduate and graduate degree paid off loan free; probably a down payment on a house; and a new lien free car upon graduation, if not sooner. The kids were born on freaking third base and upon the death of the parents will receive a couple of million to most likely squirrel away in their more than likely seven to eight figure investment accounts. I mean without debt and with parents who taught them how to invest, how could they not. OP’s children are already financially set.

Yes if they chose wise financial choices, they are Definately already set and have been given an amazing start (that most do not get)
However, if you are worth 14m+, why not set up trusts so that your grandkids and beyond are also financially set?
Why earn all the money to just give it all away?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your husband sounds like a d*ck. Basically, like the kind of guy who derives a lot of self-pride from having done well, and now doesn’t want to help others. I get not wanting your kids to be lazy or entitled. But wtf was the point of making all that money? To leave it to some bs charity that will forget him 6 months after he’s gone? Good grief. Tell him to set up an education trust or something like that. That way the kids and grandkids still have to work and be productive to get anything.

OP here. Honestly, you're the one who sounds like a d*ck. Besides setting our kids up for success with private schools and universities, we have helped disadvantaged kids through his non-profit...you have no idea. I don't know where you are getting this impression other than the fact that you are jealous of our success and generosity. Your tone, is frankly, over the top and bordering on unhinged.

I'm with PP here. My inlaws are doing the same thing. And they are leaving a boatload more than your husband--think ten figures--all to charity. They put some money in trusts for their kids, which the kids now have, and it's helpful, but not life changing. And all the rest is going to charity and a foundation so they can secure their "legacy." It's actually laughable, because nobody will remember who they are a year after they are gone. Those charities do not care who they are. Those who do don't even like them, but act like they do because of their money. Why people care about their "legacies" when they'll be dead is beyond me. My legacy is my children and if I could leave them some security, then that's what I would do. My in-laws, on the other hand, are leaving them nothing.

Hey that's your choice. And the more I hear from some people on this thread who are on the side of greed, the more I realize maybe DH is onto something.

NP. It’s not greed to want financial security for your children.

Oh and $2M isn't financial security. Ungrateful gen z'er.

It is for those individuals who do not have 2million dollars. OP you need to ignore posters on DCUM. They are for the most part irrational and do not live in reality when money is discussed. Remember, most DCUM posters earn $500,000 to1,000,000 and require $15,000 plus just to feel secure and have bragging rights.

Giving money to charity is dumb AF, they are all sham orgs and none really go to he cause they end up going to their own leadership and employee overhead. Boomers will do anything to avoid helping their children

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your husband sounds like a d*ck. Basically, like the kind of guy who derives a lot of self-pride from having done well, and now doesn’t want to help others. I get not wanting your kids to be lazy or entitled. But wtf was the point of making all that money? To leave it to some bs charity that will forget him 6 months after he’s gone? Good grief. Tell him to set up an education trust or something like that. That way the kids and grandkids still have to work and be productive to get anything.

OP here. Honestly, you're the one who sounds like a d*ck. Besides setting our kids up for success with private schools and universities, we have helped disadvantaged kids through his non-profit...you have no idea. I don't know where you are getting this impression other than the fact that you are jealous of our success and generosity. Your tone, is frankly, over the top and bordering on unhinged.

I'm with PP here. My inlaws are doing the same thing. And they are leaving a boatload more than your husband--think ten figures--all to charity. They put some money in trusts for their kids, which the kids now have, and it's helpful, but not life changing. And all the rest is going to charity and a foundation so they can secure their "legacy." It's actually laughable, because nobody will remember who they are a year after they are gone. Those charities do not care who they are. Those who do don't even like them, but act like they do because of their money. Why people care about their "legacies" when they'll be dead is beyond me. My legacy is my children and if I could leave them some security, then that's what I would do. My in-laws, on the other hand, are leaving them nothing.

Hey that's your choice. And the more I hear from some people on this thread who are on the side of greed, the more I realize maybe DH is onto something.

NP. It’s not greed to want financial security for your children.

DP. How do you define financial security. Her kids will graduate with a private school education; undergraduate and graduate degree paid off loan free; probably a down payment on a house; and a new lien free car upon graduation, if not sooner. The kids were born on freaking third base and upon the death of the parents will receive a couple of million to most likely squirrel away in their more than likely seven to eight figure investment accounts. I mean without debt and with parents who taught them how to invest, how could they not. OP’s children are already financially set.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your husband sounds like a d*ck. Basically, like the kind of guy who derives a lot of self-pride from having done well, and now doesn’t want to help others. I get not wanting your kids to be lazy or entitled. But wtf was the point of making all that money? To leave it to some bs charity that will forget him 6 months after he’s gone? Good grief. Tell him to set up an education trust or something like that. That way the kids and grandkids still have to work and be productive to get anything.

OP here. Honestly, you're the one who sounds like a d*ck. Besides setting our kids up for success with private schools and universities, we have helped disadvantaged kids through his non-profit...you have no idea. I don't know where you are getting this impression other than the fact that you are jealous of our success and generosity. Your tone, is frankly, over the top and bordering on unhinged.

I'm with PP here. My inlaws are doing the same thing. And they are leaving a boatload more than your husband--think ten figures--all to charity. They put some money in trusts for their kids, which the kids now have, and it's helpful, but not life changing. And all the rest is going to charity and a foundation so they can secure their "legacy." It's actually laughable, because nobody will remember who they are a year after they are gone. Those charities do not care who they are. Those who do don't even like them, but act like they do because of their money. Why people care about their "legacies" when they'll be dead is beyond me. My legacy is my children and if I could leave them some security, then that's what I would do. My in-laws, on the other hand, are leaving them nothing.

Wow. You come across as butthurt that you can’t get your hands in your in-laws money. You and your husband are not entitled to their money. Did you marry your husband with the belief you would someday profit off his parents death.

Why would he decide for the both of you ? If it was me I would raise hell to convince him (you are correct 2M with inflation is not much). You guys could set up a trust fund and have specifications on the funds being used for education or housing investments etc.. to ensure it is multigenerational and benefit the grand kids too if he is afraid too much would be wasted by the next gen.

But if nothing would budge him: I would demand to decide what I do with my half. He can give 7 M to charity but then I would decide what to do with the other 7M and I would make it clear to the children that as their mother I decided that 100% of my half is going to them.

And I would start to distribute it now. Discuss with them their projects, see what they need it for. Enjoy while you live the additional happiness that money can bring. More fun times together ? A bigger home that makes them more relaxed? Funding a 529 for their kids ? Tutoring for their children? Paying off their debts?

My parents and DH parents have found many ways to help us and we are so grateful and it makes all of us so much closer. We also all donate to charity and care about helping others. But I think parents should do their best to help their kids

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Yes, we will further discuss and I think it is a matter of me to "nudge" him to go higher than $2M.

Just for a little history, before this, he was intent on funding a foundation to the tune of $2M. This was a couple of years ago, when we had A LOT less money. ...DH...you are right. He is a really good and generous guy. But I am mama bear and want to protect the kiddos.

Estate is about 14m and OP/DH might have 2-3 kids. DH /OP came from humble backgrounds and he wanted to set up a 2m foundation [scholarships in his name?] and doesn't want to benefit his children and grandchildren ...wants name on a foundation for ego?

Any grandchildren exist? Why call adult DC's kiddos? Is he competitive with his children? I did this so you should also?

OP here. Two kids ages 23 and 16. We're retirement age already (younger child was adopted and we had older child late in life). So they are my kiddos--sorry if that term offends you in some way. Obviously no grandchildren yet. I am not sure what point you are trying to make here. DH is very successful in career and has always done charitable works, including starting a very successful non-profit that helps underprivileged kids access private school through scholarships. So not sure why you feel need to trash my husband, whom you don't even know.

I'm sorry OP, but I'm having trouble understanding why you think leaving your children $2M, versus $14M, when you die in 20 or 30 years and during which your children will be ages 36 to 53, means that they're going to struggle. Sure, their life could be different inheriting 14M rather than 2M, but their overall life outcome will already be set in stone by other choices they've made, i.e. their grit, what career they chose, their own feelings towards money, etc.

Are you instead concerned that your children will feel hurt if you don't leave them the substantial majority of your assets? I think you can just ask them how they would feel, such as by asking during dinner, "hey do you think you would be upset if we left all of our money to charity?" If you raised them well, chances are they won't feel entitled to your money at all. Personally, I would want my own parents to spend all of their money and enjoy it before they died.

I don't want to necessarily want leave them the entire amount...just more than $2M...the purpose is to get them a good head start on eduction for their kids, etc., and based on how college tuition increases, $2M isn't going to buy much.

Have you had this discussion with your husband? Maybe you can set up a trust for each of your grandkids to pay for their college and graduate school tuition and other educational expenses. The will could be like "for each of my grandchildren, including those not yet born, I grant $2 million," or something like that, and revise the number throughout the years. I think you could ask the trustee to invest the money into the stock market (S&P 500) and then the money will go further.

That said, I think you've probably raised your children well, so they'll probably be able to set up their own kids for tuition, etc., on their own. Do you have any reason to doubt that they won't be able to provide for their own families without your help? Obviously as a mother, and future grandmother, you'd like to help by doing more. But perhaps all is not dire if you don't.

Anonymous wrote:Luckily, women tend to outlive men, so odds are you can change it when he's gone.

This.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your husband sounds like a d*ck. Basically, like the kind of guy who derives a lot of self-pride from having done well, and now doesn’t want to help others. I get not wanting your kids to be lazy or entitled. But wtf was the point of making all that money? To leave it to some bs charity that will forget him 6 months after he’s gone? Good grief. Tell him to set up an education trust or something like that. That way the kids and grandkids still have to work and be productive to get anything.

OP here. Honestly, you're the one who sounds like a d*ck. Besides setting our kids up for success with private schools and universities, we have helped disadvantaged kids through his non-profit...you have no idea. I don't know where you are getting this impression other than the fact that you are jealous of our success and generosity. Your tone, is frankly, over the top and bordering on unhinged.

I'm with PP here. My inlaws are doing the same thing. And they are leaving a boatload more than your husband--think ten figures--all to charity. They put some money in trusts for their kids, which the kids now have, and it's helpful, but not life changing. And all the rest is going to charity and a foundation so they can secure their "legacy." It's actually laughable, because nobody will remember who they are a year after they are gone. Those charities do not care who they are. Those who do don't even like them, but act like they do because of their money. Why people care about their "legacies" when they'll be dead is beyond me. My legacy is my children and if I could leave them some security, then that's what I would do. My in-laws, on the other hand, are leaving them nothing.

Hey that's your choice. And the more I hear from some people on this thread who are on the side of greed, the more I realize maybe DH is onto something.

NP. It’s not greed to want financial security for your children.

Oh and $2M isn't financial security. Ungrateful gen z'er.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your husband sounds like a d*ck. Basically, like the kind of guy who derives a lot of self-pride from having done well, and now doesn’t want to help others. I get not wanting your kids to be lazy or entitled. But wtf was the point of making all that money? To leave it to some bs charity that will forget him 6 months after he’s gone? Good grief. Tell him to set up an education trust or something like that. That way the kids and grandkids still have to work and be productive to get anything.

OP here. Honestly, you're the one who sounds like a d*ck. Besides setting our kids up for success with private schools and universities, we have helped disadvantaged kids through his non-profit...you have no idea. I don't know where you are getting this impression other than the fact that you are jealous of our success and generosity. Your tone, is frankly, over the top and bordering on unhinged.

I'm with PP here. My inlaws are doing the same thing. And they are leaving a boatload more than your husband--think ten figures--all to charity. They put some money in trusts for their kids, which the kids now have, and it's helpful, but not life changing. And all the rest is going to charity and a foundation so they can secure their "legacy." It's actually laughable, because nobody will remember who they are a year after they are gone. Those charities do not care who they are. Those who do don't even like them, but act like they do because of their money. Why people care about their "legacies" when they'll be dead is beyond me. My legacy is my children and if I could leave them some security, then that's what I would do. My in-laws, on the other hand, are leaving them nothing.

Wow, another DCUM billionaire. Strange that these outlier-net-worth people are exceedingly rare in the real world - there are like 750 billionaires in the entire country of 340 million people - but so common on DCUM.

I definitely believe everyone who posts their income and net worth here. Definitely no one is lying about their numbers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your husband sounds like a d*ck. Basically, like the kind of guy who derives a lot of self-pride from having done well, and now doesn’t want to help others. I get not wanting your kids to be lazy or entitled. But wtf was the point of making all that money? To leave it to some bs charity that will forget him 6 months after he’s gone? Good grief. Tell him to set up an education trust or something like that. That way the kids and grandkids still have to work and be productive to get anything.

OP here. Honestly, you're the one who sounds like a d*ck. Besides setting our kids up for success with private schools and universities, we have helped disadvantaged kids through his non-profit...you have no idea. I don't know where you are getting this impression other than the fact that you are jealous of our success and generosity. Your tone, is frankly, over the top and bordering on unhinged.

I'm with PP here. My inlaws are doing the same thing. And they are leaving a boatload more than your husband--think ten figures--all to charity. They put some money in trusts for their kids, which the kids now have, and it's helpful, but not life changing. And all the rest is going to charity and a foundation so they can secure their "legacy." It's actually laughable, because nobody will remember who they are a year after they are gone. Those charities do not care who they are. Those who do don't even like them, but act like they do because of their money. Why people care about their "legacies" when they'll be dead is beyond me. My legacy is my children and if I could leave them some security, then that's what I would do. My in-laws, on the other hand, are leaving them nothing.

Hey that's your choice. And the more I hear from some people on this thread who are on the side of greed, the more I realize maybe DH is onto something.

NP. It’s not greed to want financial security for your children.

What dollar amount = financial security without spoiling the kid?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your husband sounds like a d*ck. Basically, like the kind of guy who derives a lot of self-pride from having done well, and now doesn’t want to help others. I get not wanting your kids to be lazy or entitled. But wtf was the point of making all that money? To leave it to some bs charity that will forget him 6 months after he’s gone? Good grief. Tell him to set up an education trust or something like that. That way the kids and grandkids still have to work and be productive to get anything.

OP here. Honestly, you're the one who sounds like a d*ck. Besides setting our kids up for success with private schools and universities, we have helped disadvantaged kids through his non-profit...you have no idea. I don't know where you are getting this impression other than the fact that you are jealous of our success and generosity. Your tone, is frankly, over the top and bordering on unhinged.

I'm with PP here. My inlaws are doing the same thing. And they are leaving a boatload more than your husband--think ten figures--all to charity. They put some money in trusts for their kids, which the kids now have, and it's helpful, but not life changing. And all the rest is going to charity and a foundation so they can secure their "legacy." It's actually laughable, because nobody will remember who they are a year after they are gone. Those charities do not care who they are. Those who do don't even like them, but act like they do because of their money. Why people care about their "legacies" when they'll be dead is beyond me. My legacy is my children and if I could leave them some security, then that's what I would do. My in-laws, on the other hand, are leaving them nothing.

Hey that's your choice. And the more I hear from some people on this thread who are on the side of greed, the more I realize maybe DH is onto something.

NP. It’s not greed to want financial security for your children.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your husband sounds like a d*ck. Basically, like the kind of guy who derives a lot of self-pride from having done well, and now doesn’t want to help others. I get not wanting your kids to be lazy or entitled. But wtf was the point of making all that money? To leave it to some bs charity that will forget him 6 months after he’s gone? Good grief. Tell him to set up an education trust or something like that. That way the kids and grandkids still have to work and be productive to get anything.

OP here. Honestly, you're the one who sounds like a d*ck. Besides setting our kids up for success with private schools and universities, we have helped disadvantaged kids through his non-profit...you have no idea. I don't know where you are getting this impression other than the fact that you are jealous of our success and generosity. Your tone, is frankly, over the top and bordering on unhinged.

I'm with PP here. My inlaws are doing the same thing. And they are leaving a boatload more than your husband--think ten figures--all to charity. They put some money in trusts for their kids, which the kids now have, and it's helpful, but not life changing. And all the rest is going to charity and a foundation so they can secure their "legacy." It's actually laughable, because nobody will remember who they are a year after they are gone. Those charities do not care who they are. Those who do don't even like them, but act like they do because of their money. Why people care about their "legacies" when they'll be dead is beyond me. My legacy is my children and if I could leave them some security, then that's what I would do. My in-laws, on the other hand, are leaving them nothing.

Hey that's your choice. And the more I hear from some people on this thread who are on the side of greed, the more I realize maybe DH is onto something.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are in the process of updating our estate documents and it has become very tense. Current investments are around $14M and our only debt is $400K mortgage and we will owe income taxes when we exercise our stock options (probably around $1.2M or so in taxes). Bottom line, we aren't going to run out of money based on our current spending so there will be a substantial amount left when we die.

My husband only wants to leave each of our 2 kids $2M each and the rest to charity. My concern is $2M seems like a lot of money, but when you consider inflation, who knows what it will be in 20 or 30 years. He keeps telling me he doesn't want his legacy to be making his kids wealthy. I am struggling with leaving them such a small percentage of our estate. Both my husband and I came from very humble background, and he basically wants our kids to have our same or similar struggles in life. I am at a loss at how to counter this.

Anyone else grapple with this?

You aren't rich enough to leave money to charity give it to the kids, wow these boomers

Right? Boomers...pulling up the ladder behind them, after leaving us all in a horrible mess.