Why your kids are "Economically Worthlless"

[soccerluvof4]

I guess i never felt they had to have Economical Value when we decided to have 4. Never-the-less some interesting views here.

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/why-your-kids-are--economically-worthless-200304196.html 

[nicknageli]

Interesting perspective.

[goatmom]

Well, my mom (90) lives on almost nothing. No assets at all. Financially speaking.  Just my father's ss.  She never worked outside the home.  Lucky for her she had a very large brood that now chips in so she has a decent standard of living to include a part-time private duty nurse and a cleaning lady.  Also, plenty of children and grandchildren stopping by to see what she needs.  She eats out way more than I do - which isn't too hard to do. I hope my kids are taking notes! 

[Ayanka]

Well, while I am sure my mum would never call me a 'financial asset', she does have some kind of expectation that we will take care of her if it is really necessary. Don't get me wrong, I know that as long as my parents are alive and have the ability to do so, I will have a roof over my head, so I don't mind. But children can be a help in old age. Maybe not financially, but at least they can help with cleaning etc.

[soccerluvof4]

Well, while I am sure my mum would never call me a 'financial asset', she does have some kind of expectation that we will take care of her if it is really necessary. Don't get me wrong, I know that as long as my parents are alive and have the ability to do so, I will have a roof over my head, so I don't mind. But children can be a help in old age. Maybe not financially, but at least they can help with cleaning etc.

Well, my mom (90) lives on almost nothing. No assets at all. Financially speaking.  Just my father's ss.  She never worked outside the home.  Lucky for her she had a very large brood that now chips in so she has a decent standard of living to include a part-time private duty nurse and a cleaning lady.  Also, plenty of children and grandchildren stopping by to see what she needs.  She eats out way more than I do - which isn't too hard to do. I hope my kids are taking notes!

I am with you guys! While i dont expect it and really until now think about it I hope I am not to much of a burden or a*S for that matter that one of my 4 kids could put up with me if i was to live that long! :- )   

[EscapeVelocity2020]

Well, that link reminded me that we are still, somewhat, animals and carry our early experience heavily.  Our childhood is typically the best time of our life, when we get to play and fail freely, and where we are told (at least by example) what we are supposed to do with the rest of it.  I've had an unusual experience of partially raising kids overseas, and the US does it differently than Norway (the barnehages emphasize playing outside, minimal structure) and Dubai (hand off those troublesome children to the Philipino nanny post haste).  Unfortunately, the American style leans too far toward the Dubai model, where the kids turned out, generally, 'maladjusted' and spoiled.  I hope Mustachians trend toward the Norwegian model, which is why I'm here and not on 'mainstream' financial sites. But I'm probably reading too far into what was in the link :)

[socaso]

I read this article when it first started circulating. I dearly hope no one out there is having children with the idea that it will give them some sort of economic advantage. Personally I come from a large, happy family and I wanted one of my own. I don't think I can put a price on the joy I get from my child. If kids were strictly a financial proposition I'm sure MMM wouldn't have bought in.

[avonlea]

Two big thoughts that I had while reading this article:

1)  Of course we no longer view children the same way we did in the 1800s.  Our thinking in all areas of life has pretty much changed since then.  One huge societal shift that has happened in the last seventy years or so is that we now believe that parents are the ones who are more obligated in the relationship since they chose to take on the responsibility of raising a child, not that children owe parents because they were given the gift of life.

2)  At the end of the article, the author says that parents should not feel guilty about leaving their children to go to work since their children "have it pretty good" (because those kids don't have to work at a job).  If a parent needs to work outside of the home, that line of thinking is understandable.  If going to work is a choice (like when one income would be enough for a two-parent family), of course there is more that needs to be taken into consideration than that.

[soccerluvof4]

I read this article when it first started circulating. I dearly hope no one out there is having children with the idea that it will give them some sort of economic advantage. Personally I come from a large, happy family and I wanted one of my own. I don't think I can put a price on the joy I get from my child. If kids were strictly a financial proposition I'm sure MMM wouldn't have bought in.

Totally! I came from a messed up dysfunctional family and wanted to have a large Family to have what I didnt. With 4 kids (wanted 6 but started to late) the are our life and the decision was an easy one and not about economics.

[Prairie Stash]

I agree, my child isn't good for my finances.

On the other hand, my life overall is better. The whole point of living (IMO) is to have the best possible life, to me that includes having a few (one so far) delightful little ones taking care of excess cash.

[johnintaiwan]

Disclaimer - I have no children and do not know or understand any culture completely. The following is what I have come to understand based on what I have witnessed and had explained to me.

Here in Taiwan (and I believe a few other Asian countries) children are often thought of at least a little bit as an economic asset. I dont think that many children get a very good childhood. Instead they are sent to countless after school schools to keep studying even more. They are often in these different schools from the time they leave their real school until 9-10pm. They often do this M-Sat. They study things like math, science, english, art, music and so on. The prupose of this is not the enjoyment of the child but rather an attempt at investing in their education so they can get a better job and provide you with more money when you are older.

This is of course not true of everyone, but it seems to be the cultural norm.

[soccerluvof4]

Disclaimer - I have no children and do not know or understand any culture completely. The following is what I have come to understand based on what I have witnessed and had explained to me.

Here in Taiwan (and I believe a few other Asian countries) children are often thought of at least a little bit as an economic asset. I dont think that many children get a very good childhood. Instead they are sent to countless after school schools to keep studying even more. They are often in these different schools from the time they leave their real school until 9-10pm. They often do this M-Sat. They study things like math, science, english, art, music and so on. The prupose of this is not the enjoyment of the child but rather an attempt at investing in their education so they can get a better job and provide you with more money when you are older.

This is of course not true of everyone, but it seems to be the cultural norm.

I think that supports a piece I read once,  that an asian child does better in school but do to burn out does less as well once in the workplace. Yea thats a tough life for a young one! to much.

[mm1970]

Two big thoughts that I had while reading this article:
2)  At the end of the article, the author says that parents should not feel guilty about leaving their children to go to work since their children "have it pretty good" (because those kids don't have to work at a job).  If a parent needs to work outside of the home, that line of thinking is understandable.  If going to work is a choice (like when one income would be enough for a two-parent family), of course there is more that needs to be taken into consideration than that.

I've never understood why it matters.  This statement often suggests that it's okay to work if you have to, but not if you want to.  As far as the kids are concerned, who cares?  You are working.

[avonlea]

Two big thoughts that I had while reading this article:
2)  At the end of the article, the author says that parents should not feel guilty about leaving their children to go to work since their children "have it pretty good" (because those kids don't have to work at a job).  If a parent needs to work outside of the home, that line of thinking is understandable.  If going to work is a choice (like when one income would be enough for a two-parent family), of course there is more that needs to be taken into consideration than that.

I've never understood why it matters.  This statement often suggests that it's okay to work if you have to, but not if you want to.

That's not what I said.  I stated that more needs to be taken into consideration than what the author believes should be.

As far as the kids are concerned, who cares?  You are working.

I am not really sure what you mean by this, but...who cares?  About what is in the best interest for their kids? Well, I care.

[Letj]

Two big thoughts that I had while reading this article:

1)  Of course we no longer view children the same way we did in the 1800s.  Our thinking in all areas of life has pretty much changed since then.  One huge societal shift that has happened in the last seventy years or so is that we now believe that parents are the ones who are more obligated in the relationship since they chose to take on the responsibility of raising a child, not that children owe parents because they were given the gift of life.

2)  At the end of the article, the author says that parents should not feel guilty about leaving their children to go to work since their children "have it pretty good" (because those kids don't have to work at a job).  If a parent needs to work outside of the home, that line of thinking is understandable.  If going to work is a choice (like when one income would be enough for a two-parent family), of course there is more that needs to be taken into consideration than that.

You must be referring to the mostly the educated western way of raising children.  In almost anywhere in the world where society is largely poor, uneducated and agrarian children are not essentially an asset for the parents and are not coddled. 

[soccerluvof4]

I am fortunate to have done well enough financially to be able to both help support my parents (who struggled in middle to upper middle class toil their entire lives despite being well educated) late in their lives as well as provide for my children in a way that gives them many advantages I never had growing up.

I therefore see it as my responsibility, as both a dutiful child and loving parent, to do what I can not just to maximize my own happiness but help my family - both above and below.  I do sometimes feel the burden of supporting 3 generations, but see their happiness/security/development as worth the cost of not being able to retire as early as I would like.

Well , i am sure that being able to do that has brought you some satisfaction as well. I think its awesome of you! and the burden of retiring perhaps earlier is a tradeoff that i am sure at times when your tired you would think about. Thats no different then when I think about "How Much" in enough for my 4 kids for college. It burdens me but if i have we put things off a bit more and the trade off is worth it at least its by our choice. Feel good about what your doing!!!

[Mister Fancypants]

My parents can support themselves in retirement and will not be a burden on me or my siblings, my in-laws have substantially more assets than me and will never need my support.

I am glad to support my children and give them every opportunity to succeed in life and I will never be a burden on them, we will teach them how to become successful in whatever they choose to do with their lives and not become a burden on their children.

I think that is the way it should be, each generation should take care of itself, no one should have to worry about taking care of another generation ever, but that is just me. Part of my financial goals is to make sure my family is setup to never need intergenerational support.

Anyone who views their children or parents as an economic asset has to recondition the way they think IMHO.

-Mister FancyPants

[goatmom]

Assets aren't the only thing.  For example, several times a week I take my mom out.  It doesn't cost me but if I had a job I couldn't do it.  I make her food she likes to eat and I listen to her stories.  I bring the kids to her place and she loves it.  I check to make sure the people we have hired are doing their jobs.  I take her to her appts.  I paint her nails.  Sure, I could put her in a nursing home but It would break her heart and would make the lives of the younger generation less full.  Even if she had money she would still depend on us due to her cognitive deficits. 

[MrsPete]

I guess i never felt they had to have Economical Value when we decided to have 4. Never-the-less some interesting views here.

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/why-your-kids-are--economically-worthless-200304196.html

Hmmm.  I can add family stories to this idea:

My grandmother just died at 100 years old, so she grew up after the time that's discussed in the article, so she didn't personally see children working in factories, but kids in her generation were expected to work on the family farm.  When she was born 100 years ago, a big family was still an economic asset to a farmer.  Her own father was always disappointed that he had only two girls, and he was forced to hire his nephews and cousins' children to help him work the land.  He was a rich man (in a rural farming community) because he owned a lot of land and built himself a nice house, but he was definitely held back by his lack of sons. 

My grandmother also says that when parents died (or even just a mother died), men in my grandfather's situation were often anxious to adopt male children.  By that she didn't mean formally adopt; rather, it was fairly common for families just to "take in" children in need of a home.   

That "benefit" sometimes was too much.  One family stories include one tale about a woman who literally worked herself to death.  She had something like 8 children already, and while she was expecting the 9th, her husband died.  Unable to hire help, she was trying to do her own work and her husband's work, and the result was that she had the baby early and both she and the baby died within a week.  The children (and my grandfather was one of the youngest) were farmed out to relatives.  I don't know why extended family didn't help her -- likely something's been lost over time. 

One thing the article doesn't mention is that people "back in the day" had to have 10 children if they expected to raise 3-4 to adulthood.  For example, one of my elderly relatives used to talk about the terrible winter in which her family began with a mother, father, five kids . . . and by spring they had only a father and two kids.  Influenza is a terrible thing. 

Even today, it's not against the law for children to work on the family farm.  Where I live, even today, the boys are all absent during haymaking.

I question the idea that it costs as much as the article claims to raise a child, but I do agree with the premise that children today are economically worthless but emotionally priceless.   

[soccerluvof4]

I question the idea that it costs as much as the article claims to raise a child, but I do agree with the premise that children today are economically worthless but emotionally priceless.   
[/quote]



I cant get myself to say that kids are economically worthless HOWEVER, I agree they are emotionally priceless!

[MrsPete]

I question the idea that it costs as much as the article claims to raise a child, but I do agree with the premise that children today are economically worthless but emotionally priceless.   

I cant get myself to say that kids are economically worthless HOWEVER, I agree they are emotionally priceless!
[/quote]Well, my kids are neither child stars nor models, and they keep their own babysitting money, so they are not an asset to me financially.  Not that that matters. 

[soccerluvof4]

Some how are quotes got mixed up! :-)

But I think we are on the same page! or maybe not. In any case.....