Author Topic: Relatives who just don't get it  (Read 3482736 times)

Imma

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3193
  • Location: Europe
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4200 on: December 31, 2017, 03:49:05 AM »
Just another reason to keep your financial info all to yourself. ;)

I guess that's what I'm going to do from now on. It's a shame because as a family we've always been open about money and I'm really glad about that. I learned about things like investing and budgeting because my mum discussed these things openly with us (not giving us all the details, but explaining them in an age-appropriate way) and I guess because of that my siblings feel comfortable asking me to help them out with their taxes. In my s/o's family money is a huge taboo and I hate that.

I think in most families people are cast in a certain role at a young age and it's hard to get out of that. My younger sister has always been the hardworking spendypants career girl and I have always been the frugal housewife with a deadend job. I think many people underestimate my job (we never talk about it, they barely know what I do) and overestimate hers. I don't show off my money, but at least I know I'll retire at some point. I already can't wait to announce that to my family :)

Just Joe

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6721
  • Location: In the middle....
  • Teach me something.
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4201 on: December 31, 2017, 10:20:45 AM »
I already can't wait to announce that to my family :)

May your retirement be early, unexpected and cause much hilarious drama on their part. And you can smile all the way home.

TheGrimSqueaker

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2606
  • Location: A desert wasteland, where none but the weird survive
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4202 on: December 31, 2017, 05:58:15 PM »
<snip>
However, If we look back to the original post that brought this all on, @TheGrimSqueaker was saying he has a nasty relative who judges his lifestyle, where due to her own personal circumstance cannot appreciate why TGS and fam choose to live that way. (TGS I think I summarized this sufficiently, but I don't want to put words in your mouth).

You paraphrased me accurately. Sorry for the delayed response; I have been distracted by a houseguest who flew out this morning. The visit was less painful than anticipated partly because, although I didn't achieve complete "Didn't-erot" during the visit, I successfully fended off most of the spending opportunities and the relative and I had long and meaningful discussions about financial priorities. This was possible due chiefly to my skill at making things ferment. Respect was exchanged. Nobody was fed to the Venomous Spaz Beast.

Having returned to this thread to discover the mess I made, I think I should probably do what I can to clean it up since it's fallout due to something I said.

I believe that what touched off the SAHM debate was my post in which I bitched about my well-heeled relative's lack of respect for my financial priorities. @jinga nation illustrated an example of divergent financial priorities involving two people who had exactly the same income and household expenditure (being a married couple) but radically different attitudes toward the appropriate use of money because only one half of the couple was actively involved in earning it. His example was not a criticism of the (generally successful) breadwinner/homemaker partnership but an example of how it can go badly wrong because of divergent financial perspectives and priorities between the partners which led to a very unhealthy, dysfunctional relationship characterized by mutual lack of respect.

TheGrimSqueaker

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2606
  • Location: A desert wasteland, where none but the weird survive
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4203 on: December 31, 2017, 06:39:14 PM »
FIRE for many, if not most, people here means a life exactly as you describe, of unpaid work for themselves, their family and their wider community. Few people here would assume that no paid work means no life or no contribution to society. That's half the point of MMM!

Interestingly, if my relative's branch of the family is any example, not being the person who generated the family's wealth never seems to translate into "nothing to do". They simply focus on things besides paid employment. It could be entertaining, art, fashion, academia, charitable ventures, a hobby business, or homemaking for someone who wants to expand the household wealth even more. These things often benefit the family unit and sometimes society overall.

It might be a good time to acknowledge that not all the activities people choose when FI (be it through inheritance, retirement, or partnership with a breadwinner) are productive or positive. Some things, such as personal education or travel, are neutral. They're a form of consumption that benefits nobody but the people who provide the products or services being consumed. Of greater concern are the people who engage in self-destructive behavior to the point where they undermine the financial well-being of their household and actually create financial or lifestyle problems for others. A problem gambler, for example, can easily fritter away what could otherwise be the nest egg that supports the next generation. Even just one spendthrift can plunge a household into bankruptcy-inducing levels of consumer debt.

Imma

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3193
  • Location: Europe
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4204 on: January 01, 2018, 11:09:52 AM »
Imma, I've never met you or your family, so my guess isn't an informed one, but I wonder if you're overlooking something in how your family sees you.
If you're the one that they turn to for tax help, it may be that they respect you and see you as the sensible one. If your sister has a high-paced job that comes with associating with rich people, she may feel pressured to spend in a way to keep similar appearances to them and feel stressed that she can't.

If your mom had the good financial sense to teach you about budgeting, she may be playing up the glamor in your sister's job to make her feel better about her life. I doubt that she would teach you about budgeting and consider you dull for being financially sensible. She probably just doesn't want to boast about your smart money skills around your sister, lest your sister feel badly.

I hope it's this, but I'm not sure. This isn't the first time similar things have happened but they are indeed very out of character for my mother. She's sensible with money and she's not a mean kind of person. She did work a similar job as my sister in her 20s and still feels to this day she was massively underpaid, so maybe she's projecting that on my sister.

I always feel like I'm considered to be the sensible, but plain, boring and uninteresting relative, but that could just as well be in my head.

Just Joe

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6721
  • Location: In the middle....
  • Teach me something.
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4205 on: January 01, 2018, 01:02:39 PM »
I'll bet a bunch of us could say the same about feeling like the sensible, but plain, boring and uninteresting relative. Forget about it. Stay on your chosen mission to be self-sufficient and retire early.

I expect many of us will return to work to listen to coworkers describe their expensive holidays and all their travels. And then in a month or so they might start moaning about bills and credit cards. ;)
« Last Edit: January 01, 2018, 01:05:13 PM by Just Joe »

Zamboni

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3882
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4206 on: January 01, 2018, 04:56:29 PM »
Just coming to vent. I have a relative who actually changes her voice tone when going into pathetic mode . . . she has a quite specific "you should feel sorry for me now" voice. I suppose lots of little kids have this type of whiny "feel sorry for me now" voice, but don't most people outgrow this? Seriously the most similar sounding voice I've heard this year was from the 4-year-old boy in the grocery checkout line appealing to his Mom in response to her rejection of his candy bar purchase request.

She uses the same odd voice for talking about "I'm injured" issues as she does for "I'm broke" issues. The thing is, when the thing she wants sympathy for is financial, which is usually is, I simply don't feel sorry for her. She made (and continues to make) a series of terrible choices regarding money over the course of her long life. Don't get me wrong: I won't let her starve. But unless it comes to that, she is going to have to figure it out. Using whiny-voice mode hoping I will volunteer to pay for xyz every time I talk with her is not going to work. I wonder if it works on anyone else in our extended family? Hmmmm.

Megma

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 744
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4207 on: January 01, 2018, 08:22:28 PM »
Imma, I've never met you or your family, so my guess isn't an informed one, but I wonder if you're overlooking something in how your family sees you.
If you're the one that they turn to for tax help, it may be that they respect you and see you as the sensible one. If your sister has a high-paced job that comes with associating with rich people, she may feel pressured to spend in a way to keep similar appearances to them and feel stressed that she can't.

If your mom had the good financial sense to teach you about budgeting, she may be playing up the glamor in your sister's job to make her feel better about her life. I doubt that she would teach you about budgeting and consider you dull for being financially sensible. She probably just doesn't want to boast about your smart money skills around your sister, lest your sister feel badly.

I hope it's this, but I'm not sure. This isn't the first time similar things have happened but they are indeed very out of character for my mother. She's sensible with money and she's not a mean kind of person. She did work a similar job as my sister in her 20s and still feels to this day she was massively underpaid, so maybe she's projecting that on my sister.

I always feel like I'm considered to be the sensible, but plain, boring and uninteresting relative, but that could just as well be in my head.

I think I would stop doing her taxes Imma. This would have made me mad enough that I wouldn’t help her anymore. incidentally similar issues are why my mom doesn’t get told any financial details because she tells my sister, who has the world’s biggest mouth and not only tells the rest of the family but will make snarky comments.

MgoSam

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3684
  • Location: Minnesota
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4208 on: January 02, 2018, 08:45:12 AM »


Interestingly, if my relative's branch of the family is any example, not being the person who generated the family's wealth never seems to translate into "nothing to do". They simply focus on things besides paid employment. It could be entertaining, art, fashion, academia, charitable ventures, a hobby business, or homemaking for someone who wants to expand the household wealth even more. These things often benefit the family unit and sometimes society overall.


I believe in the more aristocratic days in England they referred to men who came from family money and thus didn't need to get a paid job as "gentlemen of leisure."

MgoSam

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3684
  • Location: Minnesota
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4209 on: January 03, 2018, 12:36:14 PM »
I see a lot of people booking hotel rooms for NYE. I can see some of the benefits (don't have to drive or use Lyft/Uber and you have a room and bed nearby if you're single and get lucky).

ketchup

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4323
  • Age: 33
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4210 on: January 03, 2018, 02:17:57 PM »
My BIL spent $275 (with his ex/roommate - so not sure how it was divided) on a hotel night for new year's eve. They got a room and 2 drink tickets each for the party.  Paid with a CC and said he'll probably be paying it 'till his birthday in July.
Jesus, am I so out of touch? $275 sets this guy back by seven months!?

aceyou

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1669
  • Age: 40
    • Life is Good - Aceyou's Journal
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4211 on: January 03, 2018, 09:24:58 PM »
I'll bet a bunch of us could say the same about feeling like the sensible, but plain, boring and uninteresting relative.

This.  That's the #1 reason this forum is so popular.  It's a place to hang out where talking about sensible/boring things is cool:)  In real life if I talk about IRA's, people look at me like I'm an alien.

shelivesthedream

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6745
  • Location: London, UK
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4212 on: January 04, 2018, 02:28:34 AM »


Interestingly, if my relative's branch of the family is any example, not being the person who generated the family's wealth never seems to translate into "nothing to do". They simply focus on things besides paid employment. It could be entertaining, art, fashion, academia, charitable ventures, a hobby business, or homemaking for someone who wants to expand the household wealth even more. These things often benefit the family unit and sometimes society overall.


I believe in the more aristocratic days in England they referred to men who came from family money and thus didn't need to get a paid job as "gentlemen of leisure."

I was reading an autobiography the other day and in the 60s this man's friend was still putting "Gentleman" as his occupation on his passport. "Lady who lunches" is another good phrase, but I think a bit more derogatory than "gentleman of leisure".

Imma

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3193
  • Location: Europe
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4213 on: January 04, 2018, 02:55:08 AM »
I'll bet a bunch of us could say the same about feeling like the sensible, but plain, boring and uninteresting relative.

This.  That's the #1 reason this forum is so popular.  It's a place to hang out where talking about sensible/boring things is cool:)  In real life if I talk about IRA's, people look at me like I'm an alien.

True. That's why I like my volunteer job of filing taxes for members of my union so much. All my coworkers there are tax geeks too. Every january we have a few classes about this year's changes in the law and everyone's really excited for the new tax season. Very few people will understand that.

Zamboni

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3882
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4214 on: January 04, 2018, 08:16:35 AM »
^wow. I hope she did not indulge him with "windshield money."

Just Joe

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6721
  • Location: In the middle....
  • Teach me something.
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4215 on: January 04, 2018, 08:29:45 AM »
Perfect example, after talking about the hotel stay he talks about his suv needing a windshield because of a good size crack on it. But the windshield is $420(installed), he then asks his Mom (my mil), "How am I supposed to come up with that kind of money?

Just like everyone else: earn, save, etc.

MgoSam

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3684
  • Location: Minnesota
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4216 on: January 04, 2018, 11:17:00 AM »


Interestingly, if my relative's branch of the family is any example, not being the person who generated the family's wealth never seems to translate into "nothing to do". They simply focus on things besides paid employment. It could be entertaining, art, fashion, academia, charitable ventures, a hobby business, or homemaking for someone who wants to expand the household wealth even more. These things often benefit the family unit and sometimes society overall.


I believe in the more aristocratic days in England they referred to men who came from family money and thus didn't need to get a paid job as "gentlemen of leisure."

I was reading an autobiography the other day and in the 60s this man's friend was still putting "Gentleman" as his occupation on his passport. "Lady who lunches" is another good phrase, but I think a bit more derogatory than "gentleman of leisure".

Agreed, I feel that is horribly derogatory.

shelivesthedream

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6745
  • Location: London, UK
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4217 on: January 04, 2018, 11:25:21 AM »


Interestingly, if my relative's branch of the family is any example, not being the person who generated the family's wealth never seems to translate into "nothing to do". They simply focus on things besides paid employment. It could be entertaining, art, fashion, academia, charitable ventures, a hobby business, or homemaking for someone who wants to expand the household wealth even more. These things often benefit the family unit and sometimes society overall.


I believe in the more aristocratic days in England they referred to men who came from family money and thus didn't need to get a paid job as "gentlemen of leisure."

I was reading an autobiography the other day and in the 60s this man's friend was still putting "Gentleman" as his occupation on his passport. "Lady who lunches" is another good phrase, but I think a bit more derogatory than "gentleman of leisure".

Agreed, I feel that is horribly derogatory.

Ive only ever heard people use it of themselves in a joking way (e.g. my mother, when she retired, said with relish "Now I can just be a lady who lunches!"...then proceeded to get politically active and take dance classes etc etc). So to me it falls into the category of "gentle ribbing" rather than "How dare you say that!"

MgoSam

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3684
  • Location: Minnesota
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4218 on: January 04, 2018, 12:00:56 PM »
I'm not English so I don't mean to speak to your country's culture. I'm not a fan of the term "lady who lunches," because I feel like it could severely diminish that lady's stature. Let's say the lady in question was an activist for underprivileged kids. If a newspaper were to interview her and address her as a "lady who lunches," her influence would likely decline. Then again perhaps I am overthinking this.


shelivesthedream

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6745
  • Location: London, UK
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4219 on: January 04, 2018, 12:34:17 PM »
I'm not English so I don't mean to speak to your country's culture. I'm not a fan of the term "lady who lunches," because I feel like it could severely diminish that lady's stature. Let's say the lady in question was an activist for underprivileged kids. If a newspaper were to interview her and address her as a "lady who lunches," her influence would likely decline. Then again perhaps I am overthinking this.

No no, I totally get that! But I just don't think anyone ever actually refers to anyone else as a lady who lunches any more. Like, ever. If they did, it would absolutely be belittling, but it's just not used, so people can use it of themselves as a joke.

RetiredAt63

  • CMTO 2023 Attendees
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *
  • Posts: 20742
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4220 on: January 04, 2018, 02:14:55 PM »
I'm not English so I don't mean to speak to your country's culture. I'm not a fan of the term "lady who lunches," because I feel like it could severely diminish that lady's stature. Let's say the lady in question was an activist for underprivileged kids. If a newspaper were to interview her and address her as a "lady who lunches," her influence would likely decline. Then again perhaps I am overthinking this.

No no, I totally get that! But I just don't think anyone ever actually refers to anyone else as a lady who lunches any more. Like, ever. If they did, it would absolutely be belittling, but it's just not used, so people can use it of themselves as a joke.

Along with the gentleman of leisure was the woman of independent means.  She wasn't dependent on her husband/father/brother, she had her own money.

RWD

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6529
  • Location: Arizona
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4221 on: January 04, 2018, 02:40:18 PM »
Over the holidays I had one relative tell me multiple times that I should reconsider retiring. This relative had only just started working again (financially unnecessary) after spending about three decades not employed and now thinks work is the best thing ever because it structures your day and gives you something to do, or whatever.

Another relative complained about the cost of sending their kids to private university and how it was unfair that minorities and divorced couples were getting more financial assistance. Also said they have no spare income to invest. And some of their sector mutual funds (in the same sector as their career) have actually somehow lost money despite how well the stock market has done as a whole... Oh yeah, and somehow they are also buying their kids cars too.

MgoSam

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3684
  • Location: Minnesota
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4222 on: January 04, 2018, 02:51:37 PM »
I'm not English so I don't mean to speak to your country's culture. I'm not a fan of the term "lady who lunches," because I feel like it could severely diminish that lady's stature. Let's say the lady in question was an activist for underprivileged kids. If a newspaper were to interview her and address her as a "lady who lunches," her influence would likely decline. Then again perhaps I am overthinking this.

No no, I totally get that! But I just don't think anyone ever actually refers to anyone else as a lady who lunches any more. Like, ever. If they did, it would absolutely be belittling, but it's just not used, so people can use it of themselves as a joke.

Along with the gentleman of leisure was the woman of independent means.  She wasn't dependent on her husband/father/brother, she had her own money.

That's a designation I applaud! Any idea what time era that term was used? I remember reading about women legally not be allowing to inherit wealth (part of the plot of "Pride and Prejudice" revolves around this), and I'm not sure when the law was finally changed.

Zamboni

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3882
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4223 on: January 04, 2018, 02:58:53 PM »
Another relative complained about the cost of sending their kids to private university and how it was unfair that minorities and divorced couples were getting more financial assistance.

Neither part of this claim about "minorities" and "divorced couples" is true, and the first part of it is additionally just plain racist (but you probably already know this.) Does your relative not understand that the income of both parents is used to calculate the estimated family contribution on financial aid forms? Even if the parents are divorced and one parent is completely estranged from the child, it is very hard to get institutions to not count both parents' incomes in financial aid calculations.

MgoSam

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3684
  • Location: Minnesota
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4224 on: January 04, 2018, 03:39:35 PM »
Another relative complained about the cost of sending their kids to private university and how it was unfair that minorities and divorced couples were getting more financial assistance.

Neither part of this claim about "minorities" and "divorced couples" is true, and the first part of it is additionally just plain racist

Yeah that's my first impression of the comments. Also Ole Miss is a fine university, that's fine if anyone wants to send their kids to private schools as that is their right, I just find it funny when they complain as to their costs when there are fine institutions nearby that offer a similar education at a lower cost.

ixtap

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4561
  • Age: 51
  • Location: SoCal
    • Our Sea Story
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4225 on: January 04, 2018, 03:42:14 PM »
I'm not English so I don't mean to speak to your country's culture. I'm not a fan of the term "lady who lunches," because I feel like it could severely diminish that lady's stature. Let's say the lady in question was an activist for underprivileged kids. If a newspaper were to interview her and address her as a "lady who lunches," her influence would likely decline. Then again perhaps I am overthinking this.

No no, I totally get that! But I just don't think anyone ever actually refers to anyone else as a lady who lunches any more. Like, ever. If they did, it would absolutely be belittling, but it's just not used, so people can use it of themselves as a joke.

Along with the gentleman of leisure was the woman of independent means.  She wasn't dependent on her husband/father/brother, she had her own money.

That's a designation I applaud! Any idea what time era that term was used? I remember reading about women legally not be allowing to inherit wealth (part of the plot of "Pride and Prejudice" revolves around this), and I'm not sure when the law was finally changed.

That is untrue. There are women of independent means even in Pride and Prejudice, even Mrs. Bennett has a not inconsiderable sum, that just  won't mean much split between five daughters. However, estates were often entailed to male heirs, leaving gentlemen who did not manage to build wealth beyond the estate no means to provide anyone except the designated heir. They were basically custodians, obligated to pass the estate through a predetermined line.

BDWW

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 733
  • Location: MT
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4226 on: January 04, 2018, 05:05:34 PM »
Another relative complained about the cost of sending their kids to private university and how it was unfair that minorities and divorced couples were getting more financial assistance.

Neither part of this claim about "minorities" and "divorced couples" is true, and the first part of it is additionally just plain racist (but you probably already know this.) Does your relative not understand that the income of both parents is used to calculate the estimated family contribution on financial aid forms? Even if the parents are divorced and one parent is completely estranged from the child, it is very hard to get institutions to not count both parents' incomes in financial aid calculations.

Except they are both true. FAFSA only requires income from custodial parents (ie who ever had custody or whoever you lived with for more than half the year).

Additionally some grant money is given preference to minorities. ie if two candidates apply/qualify, the minority gets it.

« Last Edit: January 04, 2018, 05:07:23 PM by BDWW »

zolotiyeruki

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5603
  • Location: State: Denial
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4227 on: January 04, 2018, 05:43:27 PM »
Also worth pointing out that I've never heard of a scholarship specific to white males.  Females, sure.  Hispanic, black, native American, etc, sure.

ixtap

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4561
  • Age: 51
  • Location: SoCal
    • Our Sea Story
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4228 on: January 04, 2018, 05:51:32 PM »
Also worth pointing out that I've never heard of a scholarship specific to white males.  Females, sure.  Hispanic, black, native American, etc, sure.

https://privilegegrant.com

Paul der Krake

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5854
  • Age: 16
  • Location: UTC-10:00
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4229 on: January 04, 2018, 07:33:55 PM »
Also worth pointing out that I've never heard of a scholarship specific to white males.  Females, sure.  Hispanic, black, native American, etc, sure.

https://privilegegrant.com
For those who may not be aware: the person behind this is a notorious troll who loves to piss off people on the left. This is one of his better ones.

ixtap

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4561
  • Age: 51
  • Location: SoCal
    • Our Sea Story
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4230 on: January 04, 2018, 07:50:47 PM »
Also worth pointing out that I've never heard of a scholarship specific to white males.  Females, sure.  Hispanic, black, native American, etc, sure.

https://privilegegrant.com
For those who may not be aware: the person behind this is a notorious troll who loves to piss off people on the left. This is one of his better ones.

True, but it is real and not the only one.

Zamboni

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3882
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4231 on: January 04, 2018, 08:13:40 PM »
I'm going to ignore the troll and address the other comments.

Also worth pointing out that I've never heard of a scholarship specific to white males.  Females, sure.  Hispanic, black, native American, etc, sure.

Warning: thread tangent follows, is college financial aid fair?
tldr: white students still receive a disproportionate share of the aid money even now that whites are only about half of the overall college-aged population.

This is an awesome rebuttal. You do realize that, for most of modern history (until say the last 50 years, maximum), all college scholarships/assistantships/grants were specifically for white males? They didn't have to say that because, duh, everyone knew that only white males were suitable candidates. Maybe that's why you never heard of it? My own alma mater didn't even admit women until after I was born . . . it's a huge place, you've heard of it, and I'm not that old.

But, but, everything has changed! Now white students just can't get ahead?
Don't kid yourself: wealthy whites still get the majority of scholarships . . . I would place bet on this. This includes athletic and "merit" scholarships (the latter being given predominantly to students who had the privilege of attending "good schools," and don't pretend you don't know what that is code for. Wink wink people know what that means when they are shopping for a home.)

Now I know some of all y'all are going to fight me on the athletic scholarships thing. So, I did a little research, courtesy of the NCAA's own database. Would you believe they have it all set up so you can break it down by year and demographics? I did not exclude HBCU's (that was a choice in their query system for some reason . . . although they didn't give me a chance to exclude PWI's or other types of schools, but I digress.)

Anyway, whites make up just over half of the college-aged population. In 2016/17 (wow, recent data!), 65% of NCAA athletes are white. I can discuss why this is at length, but don't want to do a total thread highjack. 56% overall are male, just in case you were wondering. Not all of the athletes have "full rides" by any stretch of the imagine (well, except in the D1 "head count" sports), but athletic departments find a way to get "aid" to the athletes in the form of grants, even if it isn't formally an athletic scholarship . . . .

FAFSA only requires income from custodial parents (ie who ever had custody or whoever you lived with for more than half the year).

Additionally some grant money is given preference to minorities. ie if two candidates apply/qualify, the minority gets it.

Yes, but the individual schools will follow up and find out information for both parents if they have any way to get that information. This recently gave one of my friends fits, as her ex-husband provides no contribution at all, but the big universities were not buying it.

I don't even know what to say about that last statement . . . white fragility and the myth of reverse discrimination continues to amaze me.

shelivesthedream

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6745
  • Location: London, UK
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4232 on: January 05, 2018, 01:32:12 AM »
I'm not English so I don't mean to speak to your country's culture. I'm not a fan of the term "lady who lunches," because I feel like it could severely diminish that lady's stature. Let's say the lady in question was an activist for underprivileged kids. If a newspaper were to interview her and address her as a "lady who lunches," her influence would likely decline. Then again perhaps I am overthinking this.

No no, I totally get that! But I just don't think anyone ever actually refers to anyone else as a lady who lunches any more. Like, ever. If they did, it would absolutely be belittling, but it's just not used, so people can use it of themselves as a joke.

Along with the gentleman of leisure was the woman of independent means.  She wasn't dependent on her husband/father/brother, she had her own money.

That's a designation I applaud! Any idea what time era that term was used? I remember reading about women legally not be allowing to inherit wealth (part of the plot of "Pride and Prejudice" revolves around this), and I'm not sure when the law was finally changed.

My favourite period of history is between the two world wars and you still read about women of independent means then.

Playing with Fire UK

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3449
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4233 on: January 05, 2018, 01:56:09 AM »
In my circle, "Gentleman of Leisure" isn't without a self-aggrandising or derogatory tone. It has connotations of being a playboy (not used as a compliment) or being the one paid off to not partake in the family business. Again, mostly used for fun or gentle mocking.

former player

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8822
  • Location: Avalon
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4234 on: January 05, 2018, 02:16:42 AM »
In my circle, "Gentleman of Leisure" isn't without a self-aggrandising or derogatory tone. It has connotations of being a playboy (not used as a compliment) or being the one paid off to not partake in the family business. Again, mostly used for fun or gentle mocking.
Closely related to "remittance man": an unsatisfactory male relative paid an allowance to go live in the colonies and not come back.

shelivesthedream

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6745
  • Location: London, UK
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4235 on: January 05, 2018, 02:25:40 AM »
In my circle, "Gentleman of Leisure" isn't without a self-aggrandising or derogatory tone. It has connotations of being a playboy (not used as a compliment) or being the one paid off to not partake in the family business. Again, mostly used for fun or gentle mocking.
Closely related to "remittance man": an unsatisfactory male relative paid an allowance to go live in the colonies and not come back.

I have not heard that one before, but think it's fascinating. Thanks!

BJacks

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 32
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4236 on: January 05, 2018, 05:59:47 AM »
I'm not English so I don't mean to speak to your country's culture. I'm not a fan of the term "lady who lunches," because I feel like it could severely diminish that lady's stature. Let's say the lady in question was an activist for underprivileged kids. If a newspaper were to interview her and address her as a "lady who lunches," her influence would likely decline. Then again perhaps I am overthinking this.

No no, I totally get that! But I just don't think anyone ever actually refers to anyone else as a lady who lunches any more. Like, ever. If they did, it would absolutely be belittling, but it's just not used, so people can use it of themselves as a joke.

Along with the gentleman of leisure was the woman of independent means.  She wasn't dependent on her husband/father/brother, she had her own money.

That's a designation I applaud! Any idea what time era that term was used? I remember reading about women legally not be allowing to inherit wealth (part of the plot of "Pride and Prejudice" revolves around this), and I'm not sure when the law was finally changed.

That is untrue. There are women of independent means even in Pride and Prejudice, even Mrs. Bennett has a not inconsiderable sum, that just  won't mean much split between five daughters. However, estates were often entailed to male heirs, leaving gentlemen who did not manage to build wealth beyond the estate no means to provide anyone except the designated heir. They were basically custodians, obligated to pass the estate through a predetermined line.

The reason the girls couldn't inherit in Pride and Prejudice was because of an entail on the property, not because they were female. Anne DeBurg was the heir to Rosings Park which was a much larger and more valuable property and no one ever questioned her right despite her being described as sickly. Usually women were given money at their marriage (Georgiana had a 30,000 pound dowrey) rather than inheriting upon death. Harder to find people back then when they moved with their husbands etc.

Pioneerw2b

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4237 on: January 05, 2018, 06:37:00 AM »
I'm not English so I don't mean to speak to your country's culture. I'm not a fan of the term "lady who lunches," because I feel like it could severely diminish that lady's stature. Let's say the lady in question was an activist for underprivileged kids. If a newspaper were to interview her and address her as a "lady who lunches," her influence would likely decline. Then again perhaps I am overthinking this.

No no, I totally get that! But I just don't think anyone ever actually refers to anyone else as a lady who lunches any more. Like, ever. If they did, it would absolutely be belittling, but it's just not used, so people can use it of themselves as a joke.

Along with the gentleman of leisure was the woman of independent means.  She wasn't dependent on her husband/father/brother, she had her own money.

That's a designation I applaud! Any idea what time era that term was used? I remember reading about women legally not be allowing to inherit wealth (part of the plot of "Pride and Prejudice" revolves around this), and I'm not sure when the law was finally changed.

That is untrue. There are women of independent means even in Pride and Prejudice, even Mrs. Bennett has a not inconsiderable sum, that just  won't mean much split between five daughters. However, estates were often entailed to male heirs, leaving gentlemen who did not manage to build wealth beyond the estate no means to provide anyone except the designated heir. They were basically custodians, obligated to pass the estate through a predetermined line.



Years ago, I watched a movie called The Buccaneers (British Drama). It shows the result of entailed estates when the heir basically has no more income. The male heir has a beautiful home and estate but cannot touch anything in it.... meaning he cannot sell furniture because it is not his.... SO in the movie, they look to American girls whose daddy's have made it big in railroads, oil, etc... and pursue them to marry so they can have their wife's money to live on..

pachnik

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1894
  • Age: 59
  • Location: Vancouver, BC
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4238 on: January 05, 2018, 06:46:14 AM »
In my circle, "Gentleman of Leisure" isn't without a self-aggrandising or derogatory tone. It has connotations of being a playboy (not used as a compliment) or being the one paid off to not partake in the family business. Again, mostly used for fun or gentle mocking.
Closely related to "remittance man": an unsatisfactory male relative paid an allowance to go live in the colonies and not come back.

I have not heard that one before, but think it's fascinating. Thanks!

I live in a part of the world that had its share of remittance men.  Apparently, there were a lot of them in Duncan, B.C.  This is on Vancouver Island.  There were some also in the BC Interior and in Calgary, Alberta.   

They were pensioned off by wealth family members and sent to the colonies.  From what I've read, when WW1 broke out, they returned to Britain to fight in the war.

Inaya

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1644
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Land of Entrapment
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4239 on: January 05, 2018, 06:57:38 AM »
I'm not English so I don't mean to speak to your country's culture. I'm not a fan of the term "lady who lunches," because I feel like it could severely diminish that lady's stature. Let's say the lady in question was an activist for underprivileged kids. If a newspaper were to interview her and address her as a "lady who lunches," her influence would likely decline. Then again perhaps I am overthinking this.

No no, I totally get that! But I just don't think anyone ever actually refers to anyone else as a lady who lunches any more. Like, ever. If they did, it would absolutely be belittling, but it's just not used, so people can use it of themselves as a joke.

Along with the gentleman of leisure was the woman of independent means.  She wasn't dependent on her husband/father/brother, she had her own money.


I may just have to put Woman of Independent Means on my business cards when I FIRE.

jinga nation

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2696
  • Age: 247
  • Location: 'Murica's Dong
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4240 on: January 05, 2018, 07:39:05 AM »
I'm not English so I don't mean to speak to your country's culture. I'm not a fan of the term "lady who lunches," because I feel like it could severely diminish that lady's stature. Let's say the lady in question was an activist for underprivileged kids. If a newspaper were to interview her and address her as a "lady who lunches," her influence would likely decline. Then again perhaps I am overthinking this.

No no, I totally get that! But I just don't think anyone ever actually refers to anyone else as a lady who lunches any more. Like, ever. If they did, it would absolutely be belittling, but it's just not used, so people can use it of themselves as a joke.

Along with the gentleman of leisure was the woman of independent means.  She wasn't dependent on her husband/father/brother, she had her own money.

That's a designation I applaud! Any idea what time era that term was used? I remember reading about women legally not be allowing to inherit wealth (part of the plot of "Pride and Prejudice" revolves around this), and I'm not sure when the law was finally changed.

That is untrue. There are women of independent means even in Pride and Prejudice, even Mrs. Bennett has a not inconsiderable sum, that just  won't mean much split between five daughters. However, estates were often entailed to male heirs, leaving gentlemen who did not manage to build wealth beyond the estate no means to provide anyone except the designated heir. They were basically custodians, obligated to pass the estate through a predetermined line.



Years ago, I watched a movie called The Buccaneers (British Drama). It shows the result of entailed estates when the heir basically has no more income. The male heir has a beautiful home and estate but cannot touch anything in it.... meaning he cannot sell furniture because it is not his.... SO in the movie, they look to American girls whose daddy's have made it big in railroads, oil, etc... and pursue them to marry so they can have their wife's money to live on..
This is a fact. There are plenty of properties in the UK where the heirs are in investment banking, or working in the City, or in government, and see the estate as a PITA. It's a drain on the wallet to maintain, but it cannot be modified without consulting heritage architects and tons of permitting and red tape. Some get turned over to the National Trust (e.g G.B. Shaw's country home) and others are transformed into conference venue, restaurant, craft shops, open parkland, etc. open to the public at a cost (e.g Hatfield House).
Source: father's cousin used to work in a UK county government dealing with heritage buildings. Her stories were awesome. Think Midsomer Murders, without the murders, set in the London suburbs.

RWD

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6529
  • Location: Arizona
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4241 on: January 05, 2018, 08:23:43 AM »
Another relative complained about the cost of sending their kids to private university and how it was unfair that minorities and divorced couples were getting more financial assistance.

Neither part of this claim about "minorities" and "divorced couples" is true, and the first part of it is additionally just plain racist

Yeah that's my first impression of the comments. Also Ole Miss is a fine university, that's fine if anyone wants to send their kids to private schools as that is their right, I just find it funny when they complain as to their costs when there are fine institutions nearby that offer a similar education at a lower cost.

The relative in question doesn't live anywhere near Mississippi. But I agree, there are plenty of great public schools in their state that have the same degrees which would be much cheaper. But no, they sent all three of their kids to out-of-state universities. I'm pretty sure they pay for their kids' airfare to come back and visit too. At least one of the kids got nearly a full ride scholarship, but the other two are likely to have very poor ROIs.

mm1970

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 10880
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4242 on: January 05, 2018, 10:22:11 AM »
Another relative complained about the cost of sending their kids to private university and how it was unfair that minorities and divorced couples were getting more financial assistance.

Neither part of this claim about "minorities" and "divorced couples" is true, and the first part of it is additionally just plain racist (but you probably already know this.) Does your relative not understand that the income of both parents is used to calculate the estimated family contribution on financial aid forms? Even if the parents are divorced and one parent is completely estranged from the child, it is very hard to get institutions to not count both parents' incomes in financial aid calculations.

Except they are both true. FAFSA only requires income from custodial parents (ie who ever had custody or whoever you lived with for more than half the year).

Additionally some grant money is given preference to minorities. ie if two candidates apply/qualify, the minority gets it.
Has this always been true?

Back in the day, when I went to college, my parents were divorced.  I lived with mom.  Dad refused to fill out FAFSA.

They assigned an amount to him.  Which of course he didn't pay (I mean, the man was living on less than $1000 / mo of SS by then, his amount would have been ZERO, just like my mom's was ZERO.)

So I had to come up with the extra.

BDWW

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 733
  • Location: MT
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4243 on: January 05, 2018, 12:04:43 PM »
Except they are both true. FAFSA only requires income from custodial parents (ie who ever had custody or whoever you lived with for more than half the year).

Additionally some grant money is given preference to minorities. ie if two candidates apply/qualify, the minority gets it.
Has this always been true?

Back in the day, when I went to college, my parents were divorced.  I lived with mom.  Dad refused to fill out FAFSA.

They assigned an amount to him.  Which of course he didn't pay (I mean, the man was living on less than $1000 / mo of SS by then, his amount would have been ZERO, just like my mom's was ZERO.)

So I had to come up with the extra.

Well, as the other poster mentioned schools are often shady about it, to the point of even listing parental income on emancipated children. But yes, if they are divorced only the custodial parents income is supposed to apply. I suspect the schools are difficult about it to discourage people trying to game the system.

http://www.finaid.org/questions/divorce.phtml  see "Obligation to Help Pay for College"
« Last Edit: January 05, 2018, 12:06:59 PM by BDWW »

jinga nation

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2696
  • Age: 247
  • Location: 'Murica's Dong
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4244 on: January 05, 2018, 12:58:29 PM »
Another relative complained about the cost of sending their kids to private university and how it was unfair that minorities and divorced couples were getting more financial assistance.

Neither part of this claim about "minorities" and "divorced couples" is true, and the first part of it is additionally just plain racist (but you probably already know this.) Does your relative not understand that the income of both parents is used to calculate the estimated family contribution on financial aid forms? Even if the parents are divorced and one parent is completely estranged from the child, it is very hard to get institutions to not count both parents' incomes in financial aid calculations.

Except they are both true. FAFSA only requires income from custodial parents (ie who ever had custody or whoever you lived with for more than half the year).

Additionally some grant money is given preference to minorities. ie if two candidates apply/qualify, the minority gets it.
Has this always been true?

Back in the day, when I went to college, my parents were divorced.  I lived with mom.  Dad refused to fill out FAFSA.

They assigned an amount to him.  Which of course he didn't pay (I mean, the man was living on less than $1000 / mo of SS by then, his amount would have been ZERO, just like my mom's was ZERO.)

So I had to come up with the extra.

How long ago was this? I filled out my own FAFSA from 1998-2001.

Hula Hoop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1762
  • Location: Italy
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4245 on: January 06, 2018, 06:25:28 AM »
Are extremely consumeristic shopaholic baby boomer relatives a thing?   I have several aging baby boomer (or slightly older than baby boomer) relatives who are shopaholics and huge consumers of stuff.  They seem to have no awareness at all of the environmental and other costs of all this stuff.

 I was just visiting family for the holidays and the number of Christmas presents my kids and other kids and adults in the family got was obscene.  The shopaholic relatives are all "frugal" ie they love to buy cheap and discounted stuff and boast about the bargains they got but, even so, they must have spent hundreds on Christmas presents.  And the amount of plastic and other waste is obscene.

Each of my kids and the other kids in the family got around 4 presents from each relative - there are 4 relatives like this in the family so that was a lot of presents.  The worst thing was that each of the presents consisted of tons of tiny little losable parts which my kids are now scattering all over the house.  For example, my 3 year old nephew received, amongst other things, a huge bag of plastic dinosaurs that one relative had bought for cheap - but there must have been 30 dinosaurs in there and he doesn't even like dinosaurs that much.  And he lives with his parents in a tiny over-stuffed apartment.  His parents were aghast.

My mother, who is old and sick, stressed out about not having completed her Christmas shopping ie she had not bought presents for all the relatives and their pets.  I tried to ask everyone to limit the presents to kids only but was only partly successful.  Next time, I think I'll request only one present from each person for each kid as well.

Anyway, they all have big houses that are stuffed to the gills with stuff.  Yet they keep shopping as a hobby and constantly accumulating more.  The younger generation in my family (I'm gen X) lives in small apartments and seems a lot more conscious of consumerism and the environment.  We're all trying to limit the shopping and gift giving of the older relatives but it seems to fall on deaf ears and/is construed as "ungrateful". 

Anyone else in this situation?

Zamboni

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3882
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4246 on: January 06, 2018, 08:47:35 AM »
^Yep, it is an epidemic of affluenza.

After one particularly ridiculous incident, my solution to the little parts was to tell MIL that any toys she bought for the kids had to stay at her house. . . she didn't believe me, but my boundaries are firm. Then she complained about all of the little plastic pieces of tiny kittens and their various plastic housewares she had to pick up in her living room and that she would find all over her house. What did she think was going to happen when she rolled out the tiny plastic kitten figurine house with the associated hundreds of tiny plastic kitten purses and other items?

My solution for my own Mom was to just not mail the required paper thank you cards. I would thank her in person, of course, or call her to thank her when I received it, and so would the kids, but I would not stoop to the ridiculous follow up card. She made rude comments, dropped hints, and huffed and puffed for a few years about my refusal to mail her a follow up card, then she made snarky remarks to the kids themselves, but eventually she stopped sending gifts. She won't even send a birthday gift. Hip hip hooray! I still send her small gifts for her birthday and Christmas (mostly fancy food items I know she likes) . . . she always sends me a thank you card in the mail, which I find entertaining because it is the only personalized letter she ever sends us. Whatever, Mom, glad you feel all prim and proper.

barbaz

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 201
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4247 on: January 06, 2018, 08:53:13 AM »
presents for all the relatives and their pets.
Wait, what?

We have successfully established that my wife and I get nothing and that our children get only activities as gifts from all our relatives. But it was a long battle to get to this point.

Hula Hoop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1762
  • Location: Italy
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4248 on: January 06, 2018, 09:34:32 AM »
presents for all the relatives and their pets.
Wait, what?

Yep - a couple of my childless relatives consider their dogs to be their children so they have to get "presents".  I suggested a can of dog food but was shot down. 

Quote

We have successfully established that my wife and I get nothing and that our children get only activities as gifts from all our relatives. But it was a long battle to get to this point.

I have to work on this some more with the other younger generation people in my family.  It's a huge generational divide between us Gen Xers and Millenials and the Baby Boomers.  I wonder if they didn't grow up with all this STUFF so they just don't get the down side of environmental apocalypse and little tiny kitten purses and beads all over the apartment.

kenner

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 146
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #4249 on: January 06, 2018, 10:37:25 AM »
presents for all the relatives and their pets.
Wait, what?

Yep - a couple of my childless relatives consider their dogs to be their children so they have to get "presents".  I suggested a can of dog food but was shot down. 


The loudest, most obnoxious squeaky-toy I could find helped with this one for me (bonus: they're cheap because no one wants the things in their house).  For cats the equivalent seems to be plastic balls that crackle, although I don't think those are as bad unless the playing is happening in the middle of the night.

I've got pets, but I certainly don't expect anyone to send presents for them.
« Last Edit: January 06, 2018, 10:39:10 AM by kenner »