Author Topic: 25 is the new 21: Ridiculous parental subsidies  (Read 18391 times)

Connemara

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 75
Re: 25 is the new 21: Ridiculous parental subsidies
« Reply #50 on: October 23, 2014, 06:58:26 PM »
I'm 26 and recently returned to the nest after a few years living on my own. I pay my parents nominal rent every month ($100), do all the yardwork/odd jobs/weekly garbage, and treat the house and its inhabitants with respect. To me, the lack of independence is worth it because the lack of a $800+ monthly rent payment is allowing me to throw that money at my student loan debt. To me, this is how it should be done. Everyone respects one another and there is no tension because I'm not sitting in the basement playing video games and mooching mom and dad's groceries.

The downside is the 40 mile round trip commute every day. It's all highway so it tends to be only 25-30 minutes per trip, but I look forward to moving closer to the office when my time here is up.

iris lily

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3336
Re: 25 is the new 21: Ridiculous parental subsidies
« Reply #51 on: October 23, 2014, 07:59:35 PM »
I'm 26 and recently returned to the nest after a few years living on my own. I pay my parents nominal rent every month ($100), do all the yardwork/odd jobs/weekly garbage, and treat the house and its inhabitants with respect. To me, the lack of independence is worth it because the lack of a $800+ monthly rent payment is allowing me to throw that money at my student loan debt. To me, this is how it should be done. Everyone respects one another and there is no tension because I'm not sitting in the basement playing video games and mooching mom and dad's groceries.

The downside is the 40 mile round trip commute every day. It's all highway so it tends to be only 25-30 minutes per trip, but I look forward to moving closer to the office when my time here is up.
good for you! Knock out that debt, get it behind you! And if you have to put up with some parental restrictions, it is worth it for a while.

Goldielocks

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6445
  • Location: BC
Re: 25 is the new 21: Ridiculous parental subsidies
« Reply #52 on: October 23, 2014, 10:01:27 PM »
After I moved out (second time) and made more money mistakes than I care to admit, I ended up married with about 20-40k negative net worth and getting deeper and deeper in debt.  I had to take subsidized living with my inlaws for over a year to get back on my feet.  Now a few years later I have a net worth of over 100k (225k assets, 120k condo mortgage) and relative stability. 

I would need to triple my income to afford the house size my parents have, and pursuing that is a big gamble.

I will defend parental subsidies because they helped me make it.  Remember "All In The Family"?  Gloria and her Meathead husband lived with the Bunkers for years.

There are some concerns.  The prevalence of the practice due to depressed average wages can keep average wages depressed.  Others have mentioned lack of ambition.  People have been too polite to mention sexual concerns.  How awkward/no big deal is your parents being mildly aware of you bringing hookups home?  That alone may be worth the 1br rental fees.

I recognize my world view is in the minority, but it need not be dismissed outright.  It's a lot easier to allocate your money for either luxurious spending or maxing out retirement accounts when rent/mortgage isn't taking up half of it.

Has anyone been opposed to parental assistance generally so far? (Eventually someone always is *sigh*). I'm certainly not. My mom has told me and my sisters that we are always welcome to come live at home and eat at their table if we need to. Fortunately, I haven't and don't anticipate needing to, but it's (IMO) a reasonable form of support/safety net. You moved back to resolve your situation and pay off your debt (I'm going to assume you threw all you had at it). Some do so because they are having trouble finding a job, or one that genuinely pays for living expenses, or need help with childcare. That's all "helping you survive" level help.

But I think sending your kid $500/mo because they don't have money for coffees or craft beers or manicures or shopping at (presumably) the GAP; and saying that they "need" these things or "can't survive" otherwise is pretty ridiculous.

My parents were always willing to have me come live at home if I needed.  But man, the rules of the house were are huge incentive to leave, and most of them were reasonable, really... just not suited to a 19-22 yr old looking to be treated as an independent adult.     

No friends (anyone) in my room.  Curfew at 11 or midnight (so they would not stay up worrying, they said), no TV noise past 11.. I had to call by lunchtime if I was not coming home for dinner at 6pm (be respectful of my mother's efforts). If I did not like the 20 year old twin bed, I did not have to sleep there, etc. No shoes, bags, or "stuff" left downstairs for more than 4 hours.   Get up by 10am (to be around to see them / share time together).   Stay hidden or go out if they wanted to (infrequently) entertain, complete my small list of chores promptly and well, etc.

FoundPeace

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 196
Re: 25 is the new 21: Ridiculous parental subsidies
« Reply #53 on: October 24, 2014, 03:07:44 AM »
One of my wife's childhood friends got her apartment, groceries, bathroom supplies, plane tickets home, etc. paid for through college and even after she graduated and got married. Her parents decided they should stop supporting her and started to wean her. She knew that my wife and I were doing well with ourselves even though I was going to school and my wife was a low-paid teacher. So we went grocery shopping with her a few times to teach her how to look at prices and plan meals. Even though they still spend a lot, they donít spend the $1500 per month they used to for groceries.

(Apparently it is possible to feed a family with 13 kids with only around $1200 per month http://www.madfientist.com/how-to-retire-early-with-13-kids/).

darkadams00

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 387
Re: 25 is the new 21: Ridiculous parental subsidies
« Reply #54 on: October 24, 2014, 10:08:37 AM »
Actually I had an odd experience with this as well.  My son is 15 now and went full cycle from 100% dependent to on a healthy allowance, but had to pay for a lot of his own stuff, even paying for his own ice cream, and back to basically 100% dependent.  I honestly didn't see any value for the allowance.  It started to look almost like welfare: any money he got, he used to spend on ice cream, video games, or things like that.  I don't think that giving my son an allowance really taught him anything valuable about managing money, so we ended up discontinuing it.

Now he does still have some money of his own but basically he participates in budgeting.  If he wants a new video game, we discuss what spending looks like, whether he has anything he can contribute towards the purchase, and basically explain it is part of the family entertainment budget.  Money spent on ice cream or video games has much more value to him now that he sees that mom & dad have to give something up in order to spend the money on fun stuff, even if that thing they're giving up is intangible, such as putting money towards future savings.

He seems to understand the value of money better now, even though he's only indirectly spending it than he did when it was just showered upon him to spend however he saw fit.  I'm guessing all kids are different, however.  I think that's part of the challenge of parenting; you have to adjust the parenting style to what you see working with each child, not just a one-size fits all approach and you let them either pass or fail, similar to the school system.  As a parent, you should never see failure as an option.

15 years old and you're still paying for his video games beyond "whether he has anything he can contribute towards the purchase? Out of the "family entertainment budget"? My son paid cash for a ~$500 acoustic guitar by that age--he saved cash from birthdays, Christmases, and any side gig he could find for a couple years to pull the money together. And that's to develop a talent that he's now used to play in churches, youth camps, school, and paid weddings (the weddings have reimbursed all of his musical expenditures thus far). $10-20 a pop for used games at GameStop or some other similar video game shop should not be difficult for your son to save to buy, and that experience will teach him far more than any "budgeting discussions"--namely, delayed gratification, saving towards a goal, work requires effort but leads to rewards, etc. Talking to either of my sons about how "I" budgeted to spend "my" money on "their" purchases did very little to help them--and they bored with that discussion quickly once they knew it wouldn't change the outcome in their favor. Their questions were simple and consistent--How much? Can I have it? When? They knew the 'how much.' I determined the 'can I have it' and they learned early on the answer was usually 'when YOU have the money.' The 'when' was 'when YOU have saved the money to buy it.'

Don't get me wrong. I provided the things in life my sons needed to be successful and have a great childhood. As a result, they have had experiences that none of their classmates have ever had, and they have demonstrated great work ethic from middle school on to college now. I just emphasized that outside a few special occasions, the fulfillment of their wants would be dependent on the money in their piggy bank, not the money in my bank account.

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6869
Re: 25 is the new 21: Ridiculous parental subsidies
« Reply #55 on: October 24, 2014, 12:32:07 PM »
One of my wife's childhood friends got her apartment, groceries, bathroom supplies, plane tickets home, etc. paid for through college and even after she graduated and got married. Her parents decided they should stop supporting her and started to wean her. She knew that my wife and I were doing well with ourselves even though I was going to school and my wife was a low-paid teacher. So we went grocery shopping with her a few times to teach her how to look at prices and plan meals. Even though they still spend a lot, they donít spend the $1500 per month they used to for groceries.

(Apparently it is possible to feed a family with 13 kids with only around $1200 per month http://www.madfientist.com/how-to-retire-early-with-13-kids/).
holy crap!

hodedofome

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1211
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Texas
Re: 25 is the new 21: Ridiculous parental subsidies
« Reply #56 on: October 24, 2014, 03:32:21 PM »
Many are like this at my church. My church has a huge college ministry and the local college is an expensive private school. Most students come from pretty wealthy families.

If they graduate and stick around, most likely they are receiving family support. I'd say of the staff members at my church (most went to the local college), at least 60% of them have family support. The church pays a very modest salary and everyone from the janitor to the senior pastor is on the same pay scale (highly unusual). I know I make more money than any staff member but most of them live in bigger houses than we do, drive nicer cars than we do, and go on nicer vacations than we do.

For one staff member, they had two sets of twins (from in vitro). They live in a really cool house in an old part of town, drive an Escalade suburban, and have a full time nanny/housekeeper that does it all. I can assure you my monthly tithe ain't paying for anything like that!