Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP however my older kids have jobs however, it is expensive out of their paycheck and "technically" free for me as I have to have the family plan was my wife and kid in college is on it anyhow. I have medical, dental and vision for five people on plan.

If I quit my two oldest would go on their work plan, my one in college I guess some type of bare bone college plan (but I would end up paying the policy plus who knows if she even would have dental or vision coverage).

It is like a crazy domino effect.

And I don't think it is crazy in US my insurance is tied to my job. I do think having kids ands spouses dependent on it and something they cant control is crazy.

Why do you think it's reasonable?

Should access to education also be tied to W-2 employment?

Ny personal insurance. I think it is crazy a Dad with a SAHM and three kids he loses his job the wife and kids also lose health insurance. It also sucks in divorce or death for spouse and kids if one parent is sole source of health insurance.

And yes, my prior company I worked at was a young hip start up. I say 40 percent of company under 26 and single. Most people could care less about are medical insurance plans. Pretty cheap for company if 40 percent of company dont sign up for medical.

I guess I agree with you, but I'm also a capitalist at heart and don't want to pay for the whole country's insurance via increased taxes. I could get on board with a health care system that people buy into that is not tied to employment.

Do you view healthcare as a consumer product and not a basic entitlement (like education, clean water, paved streets)?

I view basic, lifesaving healthcare as something we should provide to all, but I don't view full health care as an entitlement. I understand it's more nuanced than that, but at the core, I don't want to pay more taxes to insure someone else's 25-year-old.

You don’t have to. The Defense budget can easily be cut in half or 3/4 to provide insurance.

I see my kids and grandkids as my legacy. A way to pass on my genes and continue the family line. It is basic biology. For me it is important to see my kids succeed not only for themselves but also so that they can give the same benefits to my grandkids and other descendents. I have invested time, effort, money, sweat, blood and tears to raise my kids. They know that they are very precious to me. I will give them all the benefits that I can, but, I will also make sure that my kids are worthy kids. Whatever time, love, affection, care, direction, guidance, support, communication, community, network - I need to give to them, I have given to them and will continue to give.

All of this is because you need to raise good and intelligent kids. Because once you have good-for-nothing, lazy, greedy, morally sick children - you do not get a do over.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A new “Parents & Finances” survey from Ameriprise Financial found that 45% are paying for the health insurance of their children over the age of 21. And it’s not just that: 84% are contributing to the purchase of a car, 73% are helping to pay for weddings, and 63% are helping with ongoing expenses like cellphones.

These adult children are expensive

Adult children can be expensive, but these expenses might be more understandable than they initially appear. T

The cell phone costs could simply reflect convenience and complancy with an existing family plans, where the marginal cost of keeping the kid on the plan costs very little.

For health insurance, a significant portion of that 45% likely covers adult children still in college, or parents may already have family plans where the marginal cost of keeping an adult child on is minimal.

For car purchases—I plan to get my kid a car at 16, but honestly, it's as much a gift to myself as to them—no more late-night drives to hockey practice.

Wedding expenses have been a parental tradition for generations, so that's not a surprise.

What would genuinely surprise me is if a large percentage of parents were covering rent or providing regular cash subsidies to adult children.

We don't cover rent or provide cash subsidies but we do cover all of the above for our 23 year old (car was bought used upon HS graduation). The other thing that wasn't mentioned, and we cover, is car insurance. $300 month for a male with 1 accident on his record is a lot when he's dealing with rent and utilities that take up 35% of his monthly paycheck.

I have two kids. One is working, another is in college. I think my kids have paid for most of the pricey stuff by themselves. For example - I did not pay for private school tuitions or college tuition. They were able to go to magnet public schools for free, and they got full tuition for state schools. They were tutoring other kids for STEM subjects since they were in MS and they had quite a nest egg. We also invested every cash gift that was given to them by friends and relatives into the stock market and just one good stock was enough for a brand new sedan after HS. They earned internships that paid big money and they won prizes in various tournaments and even before they left college, they had savings and investments of more than 100K.

Yes, we pay for medical insurance, let them stay home for free, food free, and everything in the house is for free for them. In fact, once a year, we have a big celebration at home for our friends, coworkers, neighbors and relatives - and both my kids also invite their friends, and professional connections to attend - just so they all can network for free. A number of our friends and family have found job opportunities through these connections.

I am going to help my kids save their money in all the ways that they can. My kids do not buy designer clothes and bags, or go to super expensive places to eat. They are the frugal gen-Z members. Their leisure travels happen through free flights and rooms due to their work travel. The kid who is working will continually look to get additional professional certifications and skills and have the company pay for it.

Lastly, they are very good about getting the most out of their health coverage - from gym memberships, dental cleaning, dermatologist care, eye care, new glasses every year, annual physicals, extensive blood tests etc.

No, we will have Tricare for life at 42, thankfully!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP however my older kids have jobs however, it is expensive out of their paycheck and "technically" free for me as I have to have the family plan was my wife and kid in college is on it anyhow. I have medical, dental and vision for five people on plan.

If I quit my two oldest would go on their work plan, my one in college I guess some type of bare bone college plan (but I would end up paying the policy plus who knows if she even would have dental or vision coverage).

It is like a crazy domino effect.

And I don't think it is crazy in US my insurance is tied to my job. I do think having kids ands spouses dependent on it and something they cant control is crazy.

Why do you think it's reasonable?

Should access to education also be tied to W-2 employment?

Ny personal insurance. I think it is crazy a Dad with a SAHM and three kids he loses his job the wife and kids also lose health insurance. It also sucks in divorce or death for spouse and kids if one parent is sole source of health insurance.

And yes, my prior company I worked at was a young hip start up. I say 40 percent of company under 26 and single. Most people could care less about are medical insurance plans. Pretty cheap for company if 40 percent of company dont sign up for medical.

I guess I agree with you, but I'm also a capitalist at heart and don't want to pay for the whole country's insurance via increased taxes. I could get on board with a health care system that people buy into that is not tied to employment.

Do you view healthcare as a consumer product and not a basic entitlement (like education, clean water, paved streets)?

I view basic, lifesaving healthcare as something we should provide to all, but I don't view full health care as an entitlement. I understand it's more nuanced than that, but at the core, I don't want to pay more taxes to insure someone else's 25-year-old.

dp.. so you think people should have emergency care covered but not preventative basic care, like physicals?

That's so bassackward. Insurance companies cover 100% preventative care because that's a lot cheaper than paying for stage 3 or 4 cancer treatments, for example. My mammograms are covered 100%. I have a family history of breast cancer. It would behoove the insurance company to pay for semiannual mammo and MRI rather than surgery and chemo, which is ridiculously expensive.

Anonymous wrote:I plan to retire early at 55 and pay for the family coverage @2k per month, kid will be 18

same. I'll retire at 56. Kids will be 18 and 21. Thank goodness for ACA, even if it is expensive. We have pre-existing conditions in the family.

DH's job and entire department was eliminated about a year ago. He was considering retiring early-he's 54 and healthcare was a consideration. We still have one minor kid and one kid who is in college and has a lifelong medical condition with pricey meds each month.
We would have either self-funded our medical care or used ACA. We fully have the means to do either. We plan to help the kid with medical issues with insurance as long as they need it no matter their age. It's not their fault they ended up with crappy genetics.

Ultimately, he ended up finding another job because he was bored out of his mind after about 6 months.

Anonymous wrote:A new “Parents & Finances” survey from Ameriprise Financial found that 45% are paying for the health insurance of their children over the age of 21. And it’s not just that: 84% are contributing to the purchase of a car, 73% are helping to pay for weddings, and 63% are helping with ongoing expenses like cellphones.

These adult children are expensive

You’re saying it like it’s new. Cell phones weren’t around when I was young 20s so that’s negated. But my parents helped with new car purchase and a wedding. They also gave me their furniture when I moved into an apt. So maybe that’s equivalent to covering a cell phone… Again, what’s so new about any of it??

I just retired early and my DDs are 18 & 20. I will get us an ACA plan until they can get on a plan through their employer. But I am not going to work just to have insurance for them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP however my older kids have jobs however, it is expensive out of their paycheck and "technically" free for me as I have to have the family plan was my wife and kid in college is on it anyhow. I have medical, dental and vision for five people on plan.

If I quit my two oldest would go on their work plan, my one in college I guess some type of bare bone college plan (but I would end up paying the policy plus who knows if she even would have dental or vision coverage).

It is like a crazy domino effect.

And I don't think it is crazy in US my insurance is tied to my job. I do think having kids ands spouses dependent on it and something they cant control is crazy.

Why do you think it's reasonable?

Should access to education also be tied to W-2 employment?

Ny personal insurance. I think it is crazy a Dad with a SAHM and three kids he loses his job the wife and kids also lose health insurance. It also sucks in divorce or death for spouse and kids if one parent is sole source of health insurance.

And yes, my prior company I worked at was a young hip start up. I say 40 percent of company under 26 and single. Most people could care less about are medical insurance plans. Pretty cheap for company if 40 percent of company dont sign up for medical.

I guess I agree with you, but I'm also a capitalist at heart and don't want to pay for the whole country's insurance via increased taxes. I could get on board with a health care system that people buy into that is not tied to employment.

Do you view healthcare as a consumer product and not a basic entitlement (like education, clean water, paved streets)?

I view basic, lifesaving healthcare as something we should provide to all, but I don't view full health care as an entitlement. I understand it's more nuanced than that, but at the core, I don't want to pay more taxes to insure someone else's 25-year-old.

I have to believe that if all employers got out of the healthcare business (which they would be ecstatic to do), then individual policies would be far more affordable then they are. I am actually surprised more employers don't just say "enough" and lobby for a better system. Somebody selling toilet paper isn't an expert on health insurance and only offers it because that's what you do...but they would love to be out of that business.

I work for a company with a large Canada operation and at least from the company standpoint, it's so much easier not worrying about providing healthcare from the employer standpoint.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP however my older kids have jobs however, it is expensive out of their paycheck and "technically" free for me as I have to have the family plan was my wife and kid in college is on it anyhow. I have medical, dental and vision for five people on plan.

If I quit my two oldest would go on their work plan, my one in college I guess some type of bare bone college plan (but I would end up paying the policy plus who knows if she even would have dental or vision coverage).

It is like a crazy domino effect.

And I don't think it is crazy in US my insurance is tied to my job. I do think having kids ands spouses dependent on it and something they cant control is crazy.

Why do you think it's reasonable?

Should access to education also be tied to W-2 employment?

Ny personal insurance. I think it is crazy a Dad with a SAHM and three kids he loses his job the wife and kids also lose health insurance. It also sucks in divorce or death for spouse and kids if one parent is sole source of health insurance.

And yes, my prior company I worked at was a young hip start up. I say 40 percent of company under 26 and single. Most people could care less about are medical insurance plans. Pretty cheap for company if 40 percent of company dont sign up for medical.

I guess I agree with you, but I'm also a capitalist at heart and don't want to pay for the whole country's insurance via increased taxes. I could get on board with a health care system that people buy into that is not tied to employment.

Do you view healthcare as a consumer product and not a basic entitlement (like education, clean water, paved streets)?

I view basic, lifesaving healthcare as something we should provide to all, but I don't view full health care as an entitlement. I understand it's more nuanced than that, but at the core, I don't want to pay more taxes to insure someone else's 25-year-old.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP however my older kids have jobs however, it is expensive out of their paycheck and "technically" free for me as I have to have the family plan was my wife and kid in college is on it anyhow. I have medical, dental and vision for five people on plan.

If I quit my two oldest would go on their work plan, my one in college I guess some type of bare bone college plan (but I would end up paying the policy plus who knows if she even would have dental or vision coverage).

It is like a crazy domino effect.

And I don't think it is crazy in US my insurance is tied to my job. I do think having kids ands spouses dependent on it and something they cant control is crazy.

Where do they work and where do you work?

My kid pays $0 for their health insurance for their job because premiums are like nothing for single 20 somethings in good health. Assuming he stays with the company, I think he will have to pay something when he moves to a family plan.

I mean, what are your older kids going to do when they hit 27? You might as well cut the chord now and get them used to budgeting for insurance.

I wonder if some companies are taking advantage of knowing their new hires can stay on their parents' plans until 26 and not offering health insurance to new college grads. My nephew works for a special arm of a FAANG out of college and is still on his parents' insurance.

Because their FAANG insurance is expensive, or just because your nephew hasn't bothered to look into it. I think most FAANG offers come with generous insurance.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A new “Parents & Finances” survey from Ameriprise Financial found that 45% are paying for the health insurance of their children over the age of 21. And it’s not just that: 84% are contributing to the purchase of a car, 73% are helping to pay for weddings, and 63% are helping with ongoing expenses like cellphones.

These adult children are expensive

Adult children can be expensive, but these expenses might be more understandable than they initially appear. T

The cell phone costs could simply reflect convenience and complancy with an existing family plans, where the marginal cost of keeping the kid on the plan costs very little.

For health insurance, a significant portion of that 45% likely covers adult children still in college, or parents may already have family plans where the marginal cost of keeping an adult child on is minimal.

For car purchases—I plan to get my kid a car at 16, but honestly, it's as much a gift to myself as to them—no more late-night drives to hockey practice.

Wedding expenses have been a parental tradition for generations, so that's not a surprise.

What would genuinely surprise me is if a large percentage of parents were covering rent or providing regular cash subsidies to adult children.

We don't cover rent or provide cash subsidies but we do cover all of the above for our 23 year old (car was bought used upon HS graduation). The other thing that wasn't mentioned, and we cover, is car insurance. $300 month for a male with 1 accident on his record is a lot when he's dealing with rent and utilities that take up 35% of his monthly paycheck.

We asked our kids to get their own insurance plans through their employers. Yes, it costs them but we felt it's important for them to become independent. We randomly give them more money than what they spend but we stopped paying for insurance once they got employed.

This trend of employed kids living at home, staying on parental insurance and phone plan etc is enabling them to have a faux lifestyle they can't afford. They need to learn to be self sufficient and live within their means. I see young women carry designer bags, wear overpriced shoes, travel to exotic places, eat at fancy restaurants and drive luxury cars but not having money to pay for healthcare or utilities. What's up with that?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP however my older kids have jobs however, it is expensive out of their paycheck and "technically" free for me as I have to have the family plan was my wife and kid in college is on it anyhow. I have medical, dental and vision for five people on plan.

If I quit my two oldest would go on their work plan, my one in college I guess some type of bare bone college plan (but I would end up paying the policy plus who knows if she even would have dental or vision coverage).

It is like a crazy domino effect.

And I don't think it is crazy in US my insurance is tied to my job. I do think having kids ands spouses dependent on it and something they cant control is crazy.

Why do you think it's reasonable?

Should access to education also be tied to W-2 employment?

Ny personal insurance. I think it is crazy a Dad with a SAHM and three kids he loses his job the wife and kids also lose health insurance. It also sucks in divorce or death for spouse and kids if one parent is sole source of health insurance.

And yes, my prior company I worked at was a young hip start up. I say 40 percent of company under 26 and single. Most people could care less about are medical insurance plans. Pretty cheap for company if 40 percent of company dont sign up for medical.

I guess I agree with you, but I'm also a capitalist at heart and don't want to pay for the whole country's insurance via increased taxes. I could get on board with a health care system that people buy into that is not tied to employment.

Do you view healthcare as a consumer product and not a basic entitlement (like education, clean water, paved streets)?