Anonymous wrote:We're pretty close to retirement (66 and 61), but will probably continue to work part-time for another 5 years. We lived in the Bay Area and sold our house for about $5 million - we did really well on it decided that it just made no sense to stay there and we could do far better elsewhere. A few business ventures we were hoping to finance retirement fell through (we did very well for about 20 years, but the last 20 have been very difficult). Plus, we're worried about our younger son (#2) and his wife and children.

We've decided to buy two condos in DC, one for us and one for our younger son and his family. We have an older son (#1) and daughter-in-law who live and work in DC. So the family will again be reunited.

#2 had a condo in San Francisco that we bought for him and have decided to keep for the family, so we can at least spend some time in California. Plus it could be a revenue generator when we're not there.

We really wanted #2 to make something of himself but he hasn't really worked. Didn't do very well in college. He did very well on the LSAT though, so he could get into maybe a tier 2 law school. But he didn't want to be a lawyer and never applied. We tried to employ him directly in our business but then that fell through. Before our first grandchild was born, we insisted that it was time for him to work and not being picky about it. But that never happened. Our daughter-in-law, who came from a lower middle class background, thinks we have way more money than we actually do. She generally gets a sales job every now and then to amuse herself, but then gets bored and quits in a few months. So we are afraid none of them will ever have a real job. Now they have 2 chlldren.

However it is wrong to deprive our GRANDCHILDREN of a good life. They should not be held responsible for their parents', well, f*ing up.

And in spite of our issues with them, nothing makes us happier than spending time with them and our grandchildren.

So there's nothing we can do. Even with the trust fun set up for our children by the grandparents (about 40K a year for each child), #2 and daughter-in-law can't manage their finances. I can't count how many times we've had to bail them out over the past decade. What can we do? We have to support them. And 40K is not enough for a family with 2 children. And since they're in their 30s now, with no to minimal work experience, we don't think they can get jobs now.

So we're selling our house and downsizing. The good news is we can afford some condos in DC, a vacation home somewhere for the whole extended family (maybe in New England or upstate New York) and to keep the condo in San Francisco and the time-share in Colorado (we're avid skiers), and still have $$$ left over: this is probably about $2 million in real estate (we can also get rental income). We're going to have to leave as much money aside as we can but we want to have some enjoyment in our golden years as well.

Anonymous wrote: They don't have jobs because they've never had to get jobs and that's on you.

Anonymous wrote:We're pretty close to retirement (66 and 61), but will probably continue to work part-time for another 5 years. We lived in the Bay Area and sold our house for about $5 million - we did really well on it decided that it just made no sense to stay there and we could do far better elsewhere. A few business ventures we were hoping to finance retirement fell through (we did very well for about 20 years, but the last 20 have been very difficult). Plus, we're worried about our younger son (#2) and his wife and children.

We've decided to buy two condos in DC, one for us and one for our younger son and his family. We have an older son (#1) and daughter-in-law who live and work in DC. So the family will again be reunited.

#2 had a condo in San Francisco that we bought for him and have decided to keep for the family, so we can at least spend some time in California. Plus it could be a revenue generator when we're not there.

We really wanted #2 to make something of himself but he hasn't really worked. Didn't do very well in college. He did very well on the LSAT though, so he could get into maybe a tier 2 law school. But he didn't want to be a lawyer and never applied. We tried to employ him directly in our business but then that fell through. Before our first grandchild was born, we insisted that it was time for him to work and not being picky about it. But that never happened. Our daughter-in-law, who came from a lower middle class background, thinks we have way more money than we actually do. She generally gets a sales job every now and then to amuse herself, but then gets bored and quits in a few months. So we are afraid none of them will ever have a real job. Now they have 2 chlldren.

However it is wrong to deprive our GRANDCHILDREN of a good life. They should not be held responsible for their parents', well, f*ing up.

And in spite of our issues with them, nothing makes us happier than spending time with them and our grandchildren.

So there's nothing we can do. Even with the trust fun set up for our children by the grandparents (about 40K a year for each child), #2 and daughter-in-law can't manage their finances. I can't count how many times we've had to bail them out over the past decade. What can we do? We have to support them. And 40K is not enough for a family with 2 children. And since they're in their 30s now, with no to minimal work experience, we don't think they can get jobs now.

So we're selling our house and downsizing. The good news is we can afford some condos in DC, a vacation home somewhere for the whole extended family (maybe in New England or upstate New York) and to keep the condo in San Francisco and the time-share in Colorado (we're avid skiers), and still have $$$ left over: this is probably about $2 million in real estate (we can also get rental income). We're going to have to leave as much money aside as we can but we want to have some enjoyment in our golden years as well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP again: Especially because we don't want to "cut off" #2 - we love the time we spend together. We just feel that we can't completely substain their lifestyle.

The condos in DC are in the same building. Our own children grew up down the street from their paternal grandparents and it was wonderful.

You seem to be confusing cutting him off financially with cutting him off emotionally. You can do the first without the second, or are you worried that he won't want to spend time with you (and allow you access to the grandkids) if you stop subsidizing his lifestyle?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here.

We haven't given #1 money in about 5 years and it wasn't all that much (about 5K). Of course when he visits us or we visit him we pay for restaurant meals, maybe go to the theater etc.

Their late grandfather set up trust funds for all of his grandchildren, that's where the 40K comes in (so we're technically not "giving him the money.") 40K is certainly a nice boost/floor - but since it's distributed annually it can't be spent on a "Paris Hilton" lifestyle. He also believed that they should be able feel free to pursue the career of their choice, even if it didn't pay as much, and enjoy a vacation every now and then.

Compared to my in-laws (refugees from Nazi Germany), we've all had it easy!

I guess we should have told my father-in-law that this was a bad idea, but he died in 1988.

#1 he knows perfectly well we'd pay for him to fly out and visit us in CA - but he doesn't want to come visit! He says he loves us but he can't stand to have #2 "rubbing his lifestyle" in his face. But he knows that we'd do the same for him if he really needed it.

However #1 went to a private LAC 100% paid for by 50/50 by parents and grandparents, while #2's education was a lot less expensive (at a state school). So we've probably given more to #1 over time when we take college into account.

Your relationship with #1 sounds totally appropriate and normal for adults whose parents have some money.

I think a big part of the problem here is that you have a skewed sense of normaly. As another PP says, you can spend time with your son and grandkids without lavishing money and gifts on them. You can also pay for small or even big treats, like a ski vacation or a play at the Kennedy Center. But this idea that you can't have a relationship with your son if you aren't literally paying him the equivalent of a middle class salary out of your own pockets is insane.

Anonymous wrote:I must have hit a nerve, OP!

You're right, there can be a middle ground among reasonable people. But here nobody's reasonable, except perhaps your oldest son (who is sweet-talking but still accepts your money).
Your children have become used to depending on you because you created this dependency, so now the middle ground does not exist.

Anonymous wrote:OP here.

We haven't given #1 money in about 5 years and it wasn't all that much (about 5K). Of course when he visits us or we visit him we pay for restaurant meals, maybe go to the theater etc.

Their late grandfather set up trust funds for all of his grandchildren, that's where the 40K comes in (so we're technically not "giving him the money.") 40K is certainly a nice boost/floor - but since it's distributed annually it can't be spent on a "Paris Hilton" lifestyle. He also believed that they should be able feel free to pursue the career of their choice, even if it didn't pay as much, and enjoy a vacation every now and then.

Compared to my in-laws (refugees from Nazi Germany), we've all had it easy!

I guess we should have told my father-in-law that this was a bad idea, but he died in 1988.

#1 he knows perfectly well we'd pay for him to fly out and visit us in CA - but he doesn't want to come visit! He says he loves us but he can't stand to have #2 "rubbing his lifestyle" in his face. But he knows that we'd do the same for him if he really needed it.

However #1 went to a private LAC 100% paid for by 50/50 by parents and grandparents, while #2's education was a lot less expensive (at a state school). So we've probably given more to #1 over time when we take college into account.