Anonymous wrote:So this how the rich stay rich. I thought DCUM had told me it's about work ethics and being smart.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our kids are about 10 years younger and our investment maybe $5M more than yours. I do not believe in leaving significant money to our kids, but I think that is a personal choice.

I think the way your achieve your objective is not giving them cash but an asset to manage. Something that requires some management in their end to give them an income stream. Real estate would seem the obvious choice. Im partial to retail properties but I’m thinking a multi family property (like 100 units in kids far out Virginia) or a strip mall or storage units.

I’d probably start with you owning 90% of the company and then being responsible for managing it (obviously managing the management company). You can guide them. Presuming they do well you can gift them shares with self cancelling notes.

I think this meets your objectives and sets them up for success and a desire to keep the golden goose producing eggs and not trying to slaughter it.

Why? What an odd way to approach this. You’re basically assigning them a property management job, and then if they do well at it they become massively overpaid for it?

Because this is what it means to be rich. You manage the managers. And since you capital is doing the heavy lifting you are compensated very well. Do it well and your family stays rich for another generation. Do it poorly and the corpus is consumed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our kids are about 10 years younger and our investment maybe $5M more than yours. I do not believe in leaving significant money to our kids, but I think that is a personal choice.

I think the way your achieve your objective is not giving them cash but an asset to manage. Something that requires some management in their end to give them an income stream. Real estate would seem the obvious choice. Im partial to retail properties but I’m thinking a multi family property (like 100 units in kids far out Virginia) or a strip mall or storage units.

I’d probably start with you owning 90% of the company and then being responsible for managing it (obviously managing the management company). You can guide them. Presuming they do well you can gift them shares with self cancelling notes.

I think this meets your objectives and sets them up for success and a desire to keep the golden goose producing eggs and not trying to slaughter it.

Why? What an odd way to approach this. You’re basically assigning them a property management job, and then if they do well at it they become massively overpaid for it?

Anonymous wrote:Our kids are about 10 years younger and our investment maybe $5M more than yours. I do not believe in leaving significant money to our kids, but I think that is a personal choice.

I think the way your achieve your objective is not giving them cash but an asset to manage. Something that requires some management in their end to give them an income stream. Real estate would seem the obvious choice. Im partial to retail properties but I’m thinking a multi family property (like 100 units in kids far out Virginia) or a strip mall or storage units.

I’d probably start with you owning 90% of the company and then being responsible for managing it (obviously managing the management company). You can guide them. Presuming they do well you can gift them shares with self cancelling notes.

I think this meets your objectives and sets them up for success and a desire to keep the golden goose producing eggs and not trying to slaughter it.

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t start the distributions before age 25 or 30. I was a very mature, responsible kid. Went to an Ivy League law school. Am smart. Got a good job. Aaaaaand paid off my fiancé’s student loans with the distributions my dad gave me. And then two years later my fiancé (by then husband) had an affair and left me. I feel like I would have made better choices if I had been a bit older.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are worse things that can happen to your kids than “never establishing a career.” As long as they’re doing something meaningful to them and have enough money, does it matter? A lot of careers kind of suck.

I don't know, a lot of the people I know who never established themselves and got parental subsidies aren't really happy loafing around now that they are in their 40s and 50s. And the men are still single because women don't really want to marry someone like that. I knew some of these people growing up and I never would have guessed they would going to end up like this. I have my will set up to not give my kids money until 30 if I die. Honestly I would set it at 35 except that seems like a lot for an executor. If I am alive I would give my kids money in their 20s for specific reasons (med school, down payment) but I would not just give them money for nothing.

+1 the wealthiest trust finder I know is in their 40s and he and his wife seem rudderless outside their kids activities.

A lot of people are unhappy in their 40’s though. It’s not as if only trustfunders are getting divorced, hating their jobs or having other crises.

Yeah but working gives people a sense of purpose. It really isn't great to just be on the dole, even if that dole is a trust fund.

This is true for a lot of people, but I’m pretty happy “on the dole.” I like having time to be the primary caregiver for my young kids and time to care for my elderly parents, and to do some creative pursuits and volunteering. I had the kind of job that sounds good at a cocktail party, but I was miserable. I never had time for what felt like my real life and the things that were supposed to be rewarding about work lost their shine. All you get from a salary is a salary. Meaningful work doesn’t always come with cash payments. Ask women. And I absolutely love not being totally pinched at this moment in my life and having time to serve my family and keep myself happy. I know some people will look down on me for not “working” but tbh I don’t need their approval.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are worse things that can happen to your kids than “never establishing a career.” As long as they’re doing something meaningful to them and have enough money, does it matter? A lot of careers kind of suck.

I don't know, a lot of the people I know who never established themselves and got parental subsidies aren't really happy loafing around now that they are in their 40s and 50s. And the men are still single because women don't really want to marry someone like that. I knew some of these people growing up and I never would have guessed they would going to end up like this. I have my will set up to not give my kids money until 30 if I die. Honestly I would set it at 35 except that seems like a lot for an executor. If I am alive I would give my kids money in their 20s for specific reasons (med school, down payment) but I would not just give them money for nothing.

+1 the wealthiest trust finder I know is in their 40s and he and his wife seem rudderless outside their kids activities.

A lot of people are unhappy in their 40’s though. It’s not as if only trustfunders are getting divorced, hating their jobs or having other crises.

Yeah but working gives people a sense of purpose. It really isn't great to just be on the dole, even if that dole is a trust fund.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are worse things that can happen to your kids than “never establishing a career.” As long as they’re doing something meaningful to them and have enough money, does it matter? A lot of careers kind of suck.

I don't know, a lot of the people I know who never established themselves and got parental subsidies aren't really happy loafing around now that they are in their 40s and 50s. And the men are still single because women don't really want to marry someone like that. I knew some of these people growing up and I never would have guessed they would going to end up like this. I have my will set up to not give my kids money until 30 if I die. Honestly I would set it at 35 except that seems like a lot for an executor. If I am alive I would give my kids money in their 20s for specific reasons (med school, down payment) but I would not just give them money for nothing.

+1 the wealthiest trust finder I know is in their 40s and he and his wife seem rudderless outside their kids activities.

A lot of people are unhappy in their 40’s though. It’s not as if only trustfunders are getting divorced, hating their jobs or having other crises.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have $25 million dollars and you don't want your kids to ask you for help buying a house or a car?

Wow. My dad inspected boilers for a living and my folks never had more than $600K in savings/investments, but they still gave me $15K the first (and only) time I bought a house, with my husband.

What is wrong with rich people?

And you took $15k from your working class parents instead of paying for your own damn house?

What is wrong with YOU?