Anonymous wrote:Marriage is better among equals. Men can handle having one with more money in relationship but modern women can't. I've friends who married early, husbands supported them in their medical school and training journey with their income and did primary parenting as well and they really look down upon their husbands or got rid of them soon after big doctor salary checks started coming.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No I've heard the importance of dating someone with two married parents though. They're much more focused on it than my generation was.

There are hardly any adults with two married parents anymore.

Most adults in my family, friends and acquaintances. Its still extremely common, specially among educated upperclass, non alcoholic couples.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly , the COL is going way up, it’s really hard to buy a house and replicate a UMC lifestyle. The people who can do it while working regular jobs in a big city have family money: cover house down payment, no burdensome student loans, maybe inherit someone’s car etc

In this case we aren't talking about serious family money. We are just talking about the kids coming from stable boomer families that saved.

I wish I understood this more. I came from a LMC family but my parents would be give me the shirt off their backs. They don’t have much but are willing to help anyway they can. My in-laws are UMC frugal boomers worth millions and we won’t see a cent until they die. If we go to their house and they order Chinese, we have to split the bill with them.

That’s called cheap, not frugal.

Retirees should be enjoying their money, not penny pinching their adult children’s families for money, meals out, trips and stuff. So tacky and cheap. It’s like a sport to make other people pay their way.

Pay it forward.

I actually think it's an honor and privilege to pay for my parents, even though they are financially well-off and I am not. They spent over $400,000 on my education, so it’s the least I can do! On the other hand, my in-laws didn’t contribute anything to my spouse’s education, and they take thousands of dollars away each month that could instead go into 529 plans for our children.

Takeaway - if your parents aren't a burden to your spouse or children, then consider yourself a winner.

Is this cultural for you? Is your spouse if the same culture?

Are you a son? Oldest son?

Do you have implicit or explicit agreements with your parents for who pays, retirement, elderly care, future living arrangements? Or are you free and they are/have made arrangements (long term care insurance, clear wills, saving/investments, downsizing plans, care home general locations, no crazy burial demands they have not pre-arranged/prepaid)?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly , the COL is going way up, it’s really hard to buy a house and replicate a UMC lifestyle. The people who can do it while working regular jobs in a big city have family money: cover house down payment, no burdensome student loans, maybe inherit someone’s car etc

In this case we aren't talking about serious family money. We are just talking about the kids coming from stable boomer families that saved.

I wish I understood this more. I came from a LMC family but my parents would be give me the shirt off their backs. They don’t have much but are willing to help anyway they can. My in-laws are UMC frugal boomers worth millions and we won’t see a cent until they die. If we go to their house and they order Chinese, we have to split the bill with them.

That’s called cheap, not frugal.

Retirees should be enjoying their money, not penny pinching their adult children’s families for money, meals out, trips and stuff. So tacky and cheap. It’s like a sport to make other people pay their way.

Pay it forward.

I actually think it's an honor and privilege to pay for my parents, even though they are financially well-off and I am not. They spent over $400,000 on my education, so it’s the least I can do! On the other hand, my in-laws didn’t contribute anything to my spouse’s education, and they take thousands of dollars away each month that could instead go into 529 plans for our children.

Takeaway - if your parents aren't a burden to your spouse or children, then consider yourself a winner.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly , the COL is going way up, it’s really hard to buy a house and replicate a UMC lifestyle. The people who can do it while working regular jobs in a big city have family money: cover house down payment, no burdensome student loans, maybe inherit someone’s car etc

In this case we aren't talking about serious family money. We are just talking about the kids coming from stable boomer families that saved.

I wish I understood this more. I came from a LMC family but my parents would be give me the shirt off their backs. They don’t have much but are willing to help anyway they can. My in-laws are UMC frugal boomers worth millions and we won’t see a cent until they die. If we go to their house and they order Chinese, we have to split the bill with them.

That’s called cheap, not frugal.

Retirees should be enjoying their money, not penny pinching their adult children’s families for money, meals out, trips and stuff. So tacky and cheap. It’s like a sport to make other people pay their way.

Pay it forward.

I actually think it's an honor and privilege to pay for my parents, even though they are financially well-off and I am not. They spent over $400,000 on my education, so it’s the least I can do! On the other hand, my in-laws didn’t contribute anything to my spouse’s education, and they take thousands of dollars away each month that could instead go into 529 plans for our children.

Takeaway - if your parents aren't a burden to your spouse or children, then consider yourself a winner.

What does your spouse think?

Do your parents thank you BOTH (or only you?), when you whip out your CC to pay for them?

Do you also pay for the same sorts of things for your in law parents? More or less? Do they thank you both (or only you?)

That's a good question. My dad takes pride in the fact that his kids are successful enough to cover the bill when we go out to dinner. He also pays for a lot of other expenses, including a nice vacation for his knowledge ds and all their families, which more than offsets any meals I pay for. DH’s opinion is irrelevant under the circumstdances.

As for my in-laws, we bought their home and send them extra money each month. This support really adds up and will only increase over time. None of my husband’s siblings contribute to this, and one of his parents seems to feel entitled to this support, believing it’s his son’s duty to take care of him. My father-in-law retired early in his 50s, and my husband has been responsible for his care ever since, even before we got married. The amount of money we send to his parents has been an ongoing issue in our marriage. At one point, my husband wanted me to stop contributing to our children's college fund because finances were tight, largely due to the money we were sending to his parents every month. It’s a sensitive topic, and his family is burdensome.

I advise my own kids to be cautious about dating someone whose parents aren't financially stable. It's important to dig into this during the dating phase. Supporting in-laws can lead to marriage problems, financial stress, and can detract from your own kids' well-being. It's not a situation you want to find yourself in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly , the COL is going way up, it’s really hard to buy a house and replicate a UMC lifestyle. The people who can do it while working regular jobs in a big city have family money: cover house down payment, no burdensome student loans, maybe inherit someone’s car etc

In this case we aren't talking about serious family money. We are just talking about the kids coming from stable boomer families that saved.

I wish I understood this more. I came from a LMC family but my parents would be give me the shirt off their backs. They don’t have much but are willing to help anyway they can. My in-laws are UMC frugal boomers worth millions and we won’t see a cent until they die. If we go to their house and they order Chinese, we have to split the bill with them.

That’s called cheap, not frugal.

Retirees should be enjoying their money, not penny pinching their adult children’s families for money, meals out, trips and stuff. So tacky and cheap. It’s like a sport to make other people pay their way.

Pay it forward.

I actually think it's an honor and privilege to pay for my parents, even though they are financially well-off and I am not. They spent over $400,000 on my education, so it’s the least I can do! On the other hand, my in-laws didn’t contribute anything to my spouse’s education, and they take thousands of dollars away each month that could instead go into 529 plans for our children.

Takeaway - if your parents aren't a burden to your spouse or children, then consider yourself a winner.

What does your spouse think?

Do your parents thank you BOTH (or only you?), when you whip out your CC to pay for them?

Do you also pay for the same sorts of things for your in law parents? More or less? Do they thank you both (or only you?)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I don’t get it. A high earning spouse doesn’t like trust fund benefits? Of their own or their spouse?

Why would you make that claim?

When in-laws are so involved in all financial decisions the marriage will never be between just 2 people.
I dated uber wealthy individuals - they would never tolerate it. It’s not for people who are successful financially on their own.

Based on responses here, majority are not really from wealthy families. More so the boomers who saved. Really wealthy person won’t charge their kids family for Chinese food . So tacky, indeed!

Sure they will. First generation rich dgaf about tact.

No man with self respect and a good career of his own would tolerate it

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly , the COL is going way up, it’s really hard to buy a house and replicate a UMC lifestyle. The people who can do it while working regular jobs in a big city have family money: cover house down payment, no burdensome student loans, maybe inherit someone’s car etc

In this case we aren't talking about serious family money. We are just talking about the kids coming from stable boomer families that saved.

I wish I understood this more. I came from a LMC family but my parents would be give me the shirt off their backs. They don’t have much but are willing to help anyway they can. My in-laws are UMC frugal boomers worth millions and we won’t see a cent until they die. If we go to their house and they order Chinese, we have to split the bill with them.

That’s called cheap, not frugal.

Retirees should be enjoying their money, not penny pinching their adult children’s families for money, meals out, trips and stuff. So tacky and cheap. It’s like a sport to make other people pay their way.

Pay it forward.

I actually think it's an honor and privilege to pay for my parents, even though they are financially well-off and I am not. They spent over $400,000 on my education, so it’s the least I can do! On the other hand, my in-laws didn’t contribute anything to my spouse’s education, and they take thousands of dollars away each month that could instead go into 529 plans for our children.

Takeaway - if your parents aren't a burden to your spouse or children, then consider yourself a winner.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly , the COL is going way up, it’s really hard to buy a house and replicate a UMC lifestyle. The people who can do it while working regular jobs in a big city have family money: cover house down payment, no burdensome student loans, maybe inherit someone’s car etc

In this case we aren't talking about serious family money. We are just talking about the kids coming from stable boomer families that saved.

I wish I understood this more. I came from a LMC family but my parents would be give me the shirt off their backs. They don’t have much but are willing to help anyway they can. My in-laws are UMC frugal boomers worth millions and we won’t see a cent until they die. If we go to their house and they order Chinese, we have to split the bill with them.

Are you trying to argue that your parents are more noble because they are poor and, therefore, don’t help but theoretically would if they could? Are you the guy sending money to your poor but noble parents instead of saving for your kids’ college? You do realize how ridiculous that sounds, right? Also, when you say "we won’t see a cent," it suggests that you feel entitled to your in-laws' money. You are not entitled to it, and you never will be, just as I'm sure you don't intend to leave whatever legacy you have to your kids’ future ex-spouses.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly , the COL is going way up, it’s really hard to buy a house and replicate a UMC lifestyle. The people who can do it while working regular jobs in a big city have family money: cover house down payment, no burdensome student loans, maybe inherit someone’s car etc

In this case we aren't talking about serious family money. We are just talking about the kids coming from stable boomer families that saved.

I wish I understood this more. I came from a LMC family but my parents would be give me the shirt off their backs. They don’t have much but are willing to help anyway they can. My in-laws are UMC frugal boomers worth millions and we won’t see a cent until they die. If we go to their house and they order Chinese, we have to split the bill with them.

That’s called cheap, not frugal.

Retirees should be enjoying their money, not penny pinching their adult children’s families for money, meals out, trips and stuff. So tacky and cheap. It’s like a sport to make other people pay their way.

Pay it forward.

I actually think it's an honor and privilege to pay for my parents, even though they are financially well-off and I am not. They spent over $400,000 on my education, so it’s the least I can do! On the other hand, my in-laws didn’t contribute anything to my spouse’s education, and they take thousands of dollars away each month that could instead go into 529 plans for our children.

Takeaway - if your parents aren't a burden to your spouse or children, then consider yourself a winner.

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I would want to know everything about the family of possible soon-to-be-in-laws. Wealth, health, marriages/divorces, any felons or mental illness, etc.