# Financing adult children



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Time for a financial thread of a general nature as is appropriate for this area of this forum. Unlike political threads which do not belong here at all. Ahem.

So I heard today that over 90% of parents are supporting their 'adult children' according to a survey by RBC. I thought my ears must need a check up. Off I scurried (nice word that isn't it) to the all knowing Google to get my ears checked and sure enough the all knowing confirmed that my ears are still working just fine. 
http://www.rbc.com/newsroom/news/2019/20190228-parental-paradox.html

Does anyone else see anything wrong with this picture? The only thing I can agree with is the use of the word 'children' and I disagree with the use of the word 'adult'. Either they are adults or they are children, they can't be both other than in simple terms of age. Either you take on the responsibilities of being an 'adult' or you remain a 'child' who is cared for by your parents.

It's interesting to me to read that 86% of parents *believe* that it is difficult for young adults to make ends meet and 53% believe their children are struggling to do so. I then go on to read what parents are paying for. The 69% helping with education costs I can understand. But 65% helping with mortgages, rent and cable costs and 58% helping with cellphone bills? Really? 

Do these parents not ask themselves what 'making ends meet' means? In my definition it means *living within your income*. I have been doing that since I was 18. With my own children, I supported them financially until they left formal education. I know what I would tell either of my sons if they came and asked me to pay their cellphone bill. Choose between eating out every Friday night or having a cellphone, live within your means.

And 'ay, there's the rub' (Shakespeare, Hamlet). The definition of a millennial today as to 'making ends meet' is not the same as it was when I was 18-35 apparently. For me it meant living within the income I earned. Today it appears to mean living the way you *want to* regardless of the income you have. If you don't have enough income, then you go to the 'bank of mum and dad' and they subsidize your income! 

From my perspective, parents of these 'children' are guilty of not having taught their children proper fiscal responsibility. I can remember my Father teaching me to drive. When I got my license he congratulated me and told me all I had to do now was save enough money to buy a car and I could use my license. I didn't even get to 'borrow' Dad's car. He taught me how to drive and then he taught me how to get a car. Nor did he teach me how to get a loan to buy a car. He taught me to save until I had enough to *buy* a car. 

What we have now is this: https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/canadia...debt-at-fastest-rate-in-2017-report-1.1013994 No wonder their parents have to subsidize them, they're already in debt and 'can't make ends meet' as a result. I note in particular this comment, "may be struggling because of inexperience in managing credit obligations and a less disciplined approach to making debt payments regularly". Well duh, who taught them not to go into debt in the first place? My Dad certainly didn't teach me to do that. He taught me to only spend money I had in my pocket, not money I didn't have. Now there is a novel concept. 

So how are your kids and grandkids doing? And what have you, or are you, teaching them? This forum tends to interest those interested in financial matters, it would be interesting to do a survey of all this forum's members in regards to the idea of subsidizing 'adult children'. That's such a ridiculous term and yet perhaps very apt indeed. The question is, who is to blame for them still being children.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

My oldest just started post secondary this year. Technically, I still pay for most things like a cell phone, gas, education, books, etc. They’re getting their first job this summer, which should pay well from what we’ve seen from the interviews. They’ve also gotten some scholarships.

The scholarships were put into a TFSA where I’ve been teaching them how to evaluate companies and learn to invest in stocks as there is more than enough money in their RRSP for their education. 

With the money from the job, they are considering a down payment on a rental property to start getting into the family hobby and have a steady income, plus some savings for next year. I may have to co-sign their loan, which I wouldn’t be against, but it would be their money or credit and responsibility. They’ve already been shadowing me on my latest purchases and are scanning the listings looking at the market. They are much more serious, learning the finer details (they’ve been exposed to the industry since birth, but now are getting involved) such as contracts, negotiations, banking, etc.

As they earn money, they’ll pay for more of their “wants” and I’ll start to back off. By the time they graduate, they should have a small passive income and some real world experience in stock investing and real estate investing. They have plans to get heavily into real estate going forward having been brought up in the business. They plan to use their jobs to get them started, but don’t plan to have jobs for long...at least not doing something that they don’t want to do. They’ve seen the freedom of passive income and that is their goal. 

They’ve been taught since birth about delayed gratification, the difference between “wants” and “needs” (where we live, a car and cell phone are “needs” because it’s a long drive to get to things like school (or anywhere and breakdowns can happen), but they don’t have fancy cars or expensive plans). They know how to cook and shop so they don’t get to eat out unless they pay for it themselves or I take them. They don’t complain about anything they are given such as the computer for school, clothes, their phone plan, their car, etc. Because they know they didn’t pay for them. They appreciate what they have. My guess is, they’d probably have bought something similar since they don’t have an attitude of needing the latest and greatest, or fad stuff. 

The idea of learning to invest and getting into real estate was theirs (they figured they’d be making way more money than they’d need at their age, upwards of $35/hour, so they wanted to put the extra to use and not blow it like their friends) not something I suggested or forced upon them (though I did allow them to use the scholarship money instead of having them pay for school with it), to me it’s just a different kind of education, so they are contributing to it. 

So, upon reflection, I seem to be supporting my adult kids in some ways, but when they are done school they should be on a firm foundation to be independent going forward. Until they were 18, they were allowed to be kids (no summer jobs were expected, they played sports), now they are making the transition to being adults so they are learning the skills needed. For example they have a credit card which I’d pay if used only for gas and emergencies. They’ve learned it’s not free money (the first month they went a little wild and discovered they had to pay for the fast food and other things that were so “easy” to buy). Since then, they only use it as expected. 

I don’t think kids can go directly from being a kid to being an adult just by turning 18. I think it requires some learning (as credit card use shows, I had a similar first month with mine) and a transition period. So, supporting them at an early age as they develop their skills isn’t a bad thing, but I don’t expect it to last beyond their post secondary education. I’m also not going to support them in post secondary indefinitely, they can’t hide in school and avoid the real world, not that they would, like some of my friends did growing up. If they tried doing that, I’d cut off support and they could continue as long as they figured out how to pay for it.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

It's just one of the many many signs that things are going to get much worse before they get better. Far less of this generation who happen to be independently successful are having kids anymore.

For the ones who can't have the same lifestyle they got accustomed to from their parents, they either mooch or learn a new lifestyle. Minimalism and anti-consumerism is very much trending now

The cycle continues downward either way until something breaks. I give it another decade or so


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

I read that survey with interest as well. I think we need to consider that the survey was conducted for RBC and was a limited (1,004 individuals) online survey.
I also felt that their title, "Parental Paradox: Trying to save for retirement while supporting adult children" may have been a bit self-serving.

The results showed that a large number (85%) felt their children were trying to become financially independent, and only a small number (33%) were concerned about jeopardizing their own retirement date. They were glad to be able to help (88%) and the average annual spend was $3,729. That seems pretty small to me.

I also agree (86%) that it is more difficult to launch (not impossible - but more difficult) than it was when we left high school because of large changes in the nature of our economy & jobs (manufacturing, resources, contracting...), and large changes in society & products (rampant advertising, consumerism...). 

For example, my wife and I spent most of our lives with a landline and a tv with rabbit ears. We didn't each 'need' a cellphone, data plan, internet, netflix, etc. Even living within your means these days means budgeting for 'necessities' that didn't even exist when we were younger. 
If my $250 '67 Pontiac was running a bit rough I'd fix it with parts from Canadian Tire. Fast food was popcorn cooked in a pot on the stove. Vacations were a camping trip to the Outlet, etc.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

I suspect a lot of the difference, over time, is that the Parents are much better off, as opposed to the children having greater struggles. 

Probably a little to do with more women working in the workplace, at better incomes then our parents had when most of us were children. Add to that, our government increasing the child benefit programs every time there is an election and we have what we have.

The last ingredient, in my opinion, is the lower average number of children each couple has today. I suspect the other 10% are probably parents struggling with 4 or more children. Let's face it. How much help, above feeding and clothing them, can a parent with 6 or 7 children, really give?

I suspect that is where the difference lies, from our generation to this one. Not in attitudes of either the parent or child, but more the abilities of the parents. I am sure my mother would have spoiled the daylights out of me, if she had more money and less children to do it with and like today's kids, I probably would have let her.


----------



## marina628 (Dec 14, 2010)

Rent in Toronto is $2000+ a month not many starting out can afford this on their own so not surprised by these numbers .My son has a full time job and a part time job but we choose to pay part of the rent so he lives in a place that is accessible to me .In 2015 he lived in a cheaper apartment but I could never visit him there ,I prefer to help my kids while I am alive than leave it to them when I die .


----------



## birdman (Feb 12, 2013)

By way of background I had a good career in the financial services industry and managed to retire at age 55. For the most part my good wife was a stay at home mom and that was the hard job. Anyways, our children turned out fine and are now in their 40's, married with children, and are well on their way to owning their own home. Our oldest son was not a great student but was a good athlete and had lots of friends and was always busy. After high school he went to college in the USA for a year (sports related) but I paid for it but he just played his sports and partied and did not do well. It was about $10,00. a year in those days and I paid this but refused the next year after he failed most of his courses. He got a job and was did well and I guess he was about 23-25 yrs when I told him it was time he moved out and I lent him $20,000. to buy a 2 bdrm condo with a purchase price of $80,000. A few years later he sold his house and after repaying me he pocketed about $25,000. He moved out of town to expand his career, bought a modest house, met his future wife, and have since moved twice. He now manages his own shop, makes about 100,000. a year, has 2 children, will have their modest house paid for in about 5 yrs, and have $$ in savings. I am not involved with their financial affairs albeit I provide them coaching. Hi wife works a couple of days a week and works "moms hours" in the health care field and she will pursue this to FT when the children are older. I would guess her earning potential in a FT job would be 75,000. +/- if or when she pursues FT. Neither of them are extravagant spenders but their children are just starting to cost them a few$$ with their activities. 
Our second son was a good student and graduated from university with a science degree and is just a couple of years younger than the other. While at university he managed a floor in one of the dorms and usually had 2 jobs in the summer. I gave him my older vehicle and told him I would give him whatever he needed as long as he performed ok at school. This worked out to about $4,000. a year. After graduation he secured a job which happened to be where we live and moved back home. As with the first, after a couple of years at home I lent him about 20,000. for the dp on a condo and he followed the same route. He had a few jobs since and has since got married, have a young daughter, and has a government job in another city and makes about 100,000. His wife is in health care and probably makes about 80-90,000. They own their own home with a mtge, spend lots, save little, but pay lots into their pension and will have plenty when they retire. Both children will inherit our estate.
With the exception of taking both families to Mexico for a week a couple of years ago we do not assist them financially, however, they know we are here if they need it. If mtge rates get too high I would take it over, if they need short term help I will write a cheque, and eventually I expect we will start passing our surplus cash over to them.
So, thats about it. One is frugal, one is somewhat extravagant, but both are doing fine with good incomes. The main difference compared to our life is that their spouses both work so really, they have it pretty easy and money is not an issue. Mind you, we were married at age 23 yrs and they were 35 and inflation helped us. I paid $18,000. for our first house in the Dunbar area of Vancouver around 1970. One thing I felt important was to gently encourage our children to get out on their own at a fairly early age as opposed to staying with us. Also, when they were working and staying at home we charged them a nominal amount for room and board which we felt would be a step in their realizing that things cost money. This rent money was gifted to them later.
All in all things worked well and I think both of them as well as ourselves benefited from reasonable housing prices compared to today.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

We have a much higher financial ability to help our kids than my parents did. I always thought that kids that were given more would be come entitled or spoiled. Now, I have been reflecting 'more than what'. I did a lot on my own but my parents still supported me. I was allowed to live at home rent free when in school, and even when I first graduated, I had full use of the family car. I paid for most of my own tuition via scholarships and student loans. My parents helped me with books and one year of tuition when I was not eligible for a loan because they sold their business. By some peoples standards, I was spoiled, because I did average (though had the potential to do well if actually studied), had a part time job that I used to party, and still managed to have a ton of material consumer (or consumed debt). I definitely did not model a perfect responsible student or young adult. It took me a few years to figure things out, and my family helped the best the could. After a few years, getting out of debt, I actually did turn it around, but I turned it around because of family. Since my mid twenties, I was on my way to being the much more responsible adult I am today but that doesn't just turn at 18 for most kids. 

I don't believe that your kids become fully functioning adults the moment they turn 18, that's just some arbitrary number. Heck, they say for a males they growth hormone and brains don't stop developing until about 25 and females 21/22. I have the benefit of seeing my nieces and nephew how are all adults. They all benefitted from having parents that have supported and helped them along the way. I see how they are now in the late 20's as fully functional adults that their parents did pay their way and help them while in school and on their first jobs. They are all and will be more privileged than my kids. I see how they have turned out. I hope that my kids turn out as well as them. As their mothers have told me, that raising kids doesn't stop when they are legally of age, nor even when they are out of the home. 

My nieces and nephews all know the support is there if ever needed. They also have been raised that there is pride in doing things for themselves. What this allows them is to be able to know there is a safety net. It is quite liberating to know that you have enough support to do anything that you want, but not enough to do nothing. It allows kids to take the risks to try something and know that if it goes really bad that you won't but out on the street and destitute. That's what my parents did when may siblings wanted to start their own companies, some failed, so they had a home, but the home wasn't always the most peaceful or nice, so there was a lot of motivation not to fail.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

We really started with our two sons in high school. They chose to go to a high school 'outside' our catchment area and had a choice of using the city bus, or us buying them a car and teaching them responsibility. We chose the car route buying a well used Toyota Tercel with a deal that they had to work to put gas in the car, contribute to insurance, and maintain it. They did that for 2.5 years learning to budget so that when they went to U of C (but lived at home), they knew they had to continue funding their own personal living expenses. We paid tuition and books only. 

Part way through university, we went as ex-pats to the USA so we sold the house and bought a townhouse that would keep us in the Calgary market and the boys lived there rent free while continuing their education and into their first jobs. They had to pay townhouse utilities, etc, etc.

By the time we returned, they had enough traction in their careers to head out on their own and save their own down payments for their own properties. To this day, a decade plus later, they are highly responsible, good at budgets, and living within their means.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

My above post was how I was raised, and our context. This part is how I am raising my kids, who are 10 and 13 so still need a lot of support. We talk about finances and money all the time as a family and find teachable moments all the time. We have been teaching them the 'technicals' of money, such as making money, budgeting, saving, debt, spending less than you make, compound interests, and soon will be having them take on investing more. We are trying to teach them money as a tool which you can get out of text books and they are pretty cut an dry. The other, and more difficult part is the money as a feeling or the values of money. I have learned that finances also have a values or judgement portion that I cannot control, but only shape. We have been teaching delayed gratification, critical thinking on their purchases, what makes them really happy, considering materialism, short term vs long goals. We really want our kids to learn balance, and try bring that into our day to day.

In terms of helping the, we have based on our retirement dates on when the youngest is 25. We decided that at this time we will have provided them all the tools they will need to get out in life. Either they have finished their post graduate education or they need a kick out the door. We have told our kids we will help them with schooling, provided they meet an expectation of at least a B+ (we might move it to an A-) but don't know yet. They are expected to help around the house, work in the summers, and contribute to society. I am sure we will modify this, as my oldest asked if she decides to go to medical school with a specialty if we will still allow her to live at home. I figure for a 13 year to be thinking of this, is showing immense maturity. 

Generally, we have told our kids if they are responsible, show gratitude and understand that what we offer them is a privilege that they need to work for in other ways (school, volunteering, being responsible ect) we will support them. They know our support comes from their effort and results and they are expected to pick professions or businesses that will be able to support the lifestyle they want to live. 


Back to the report, I could easily see parents helping their kids until their mid 20's, I actually think that's a parents role. Into their 30's, I think it depends why. If my kids doesn't finish school until they are almost thirty, I will let them stay at home for their first job (we will ask for rent), and then off they go.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

I think the press and many others see some of this and figure that today's generation is somehow too spoiled and therefore will not amount to much.

I have no such opinion. Most of the spoiling, so to speak, happens when they are college age or younger and for the ones where parents help them out with a down payment on a mortgage, they are still left with around 300 mortgage payments, a lot more insurance and property tax payments, hundreds of repairs and I could go on. I doubt anything negative comes about from this help except a possible chance. Could they have done it without the parents help? Probably, but it would have taken a lot longer and for everyone, time is a limited quantity.

I remember watching an episode of "Saving Private Ryan" and a guy I was watching it with asked if I thought today's kids would have got into that landing craft to land on Omaha beach in 1944, like a lot of our fore fathers did. I suspect he felt that the older generation was a lot harder and tougher then today's younger generation. I told him they would, without a doubt. Down deep in, people are the same, throughout all generations. They do what needs to be done and will always take the easier route if one is possible. That is not today's generation that is all generations. I could cut the wood I need for my new deck with a hand saw but I find it a lot easier to use the power saw. I wouldn't even know where my hand saw is. The only thing better is if I could find someone, who I might have helped in the past with a down payment, to cut the wood for me. lol.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

I think there is a difference between helping or supporting your kids at some points in their life and enabling your kids. Paying their rent or cellphone when they are finished their education, have a job and are living on their own, is not 'helping' them in my opinion, it is enabling them to have a lifestyle they cannot afford.

Giving a son or daughter a gift of a down payment on a mortgage if you can afford to is fine by me. You are helping them get on the property ladder but then expecting them to make mortgage payments on their own. Paying part or all of their mortgage payments or rent is NOT helping but enabling. Living within their means, means just that. If they cannot afford to pay $2000 in rent then they need to find somewhere cheaper to rent. If they cannot afford the latest version iPhone then they need to get a cheaper cellphone, not have you pay for it.

I think this difference between helping and enabling can sometimes be hard to see for some parents. Some responding with their stories above, have demonstrated helping while others have demonstrated examples of enabling. 

I have a family member who continually makes bad financial decisions and I'm talking over decades. It is very hard to see a family member whether it is your child or your sibling or cousin, etc. in a position of possibly becoming homeless at the worst and not want to help. In the case of my family member, 'help' has been given by various other family members countless times. But is it really helping or only enabling? It can be argued that what is learned by the person is that if they screw up, it will be OK, someone else will solve their problem for them. Sometimes, you have to let someone fall on their face to learn to look and see the things that they are tripping over.

I don't think it is that difficult to determine if someone is 'living within their means' or not. Consider this. If the parents are not in a position to offer financial 'support', which is all we are really talking about here. ie. money, then what would the 'kids' have to do?


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

Longtimeago said:


> I think this difference between helping and enabling can sometimes be hard to see for some parents. Some responding with their stories above, have demonstrated helping while others have demonstrated examples of enabling.



sorry i don't see any stories of enabling

all i see are responsible, thoughtful parents describing how they gently assisted their teen-age & young adult offspring out of the nest & into an independent world. It's not a process that happens overnight, because of the need for education/training it takes years.

lucky are the offspring with this kind of nurturing parent


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

On the other side of the coin, I’ve got a buddy who’s brother is older than me who is living in his parent’s basement. He was a large equipment operator who always thought he knew better than his employer and would tell them so. He made good coin, but tried to buy “friends” at the bar every night. He’s gotten beat up several times, robbed, etc. For his efforts. 

Eventually he was blackballed in the industry and could only work in the family company...but burned that bridge too. He, of course, thinks he deserves a well paying job and won’t settle for less. Has used up all his benefits, sold everything he owns (or had it repossessed) and is now waiting to blow his inheritance when his parents die. Shouldn’t take him more than 4-6 months to blow and then I’m not sure what he’d do...maybe move in with his brother to whom he owes thousands of dollars which he’ll never repay.

His isn’t his first time in the basement either, though he’s been there as long as I’ve known my friend, he’s been there most of his life when he wasn’t in a camp.


I know another guy, also older than me, who, when young, was diagnosed with kidney disease. He was treated like a child and spoiled his whole life (never cooked, cleaned or anything because he was “sick”). He eventually got a kidney transplant and still lived at home until, eventually he married a widower. He moved from his home to hers and expected her to take care of him just like his parents did.

The marriage didn’t last long, so he moved back home and, as far as I know, is still there today being taken care of by his parents.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

Longtimeago said:


> I think there is a difference between helping or supporting your kids at some points in their life and enabling your kids. Paying their rent or cellphone when they are finished their education, have a job and are living on their own, is not 'helping' them in my opinion, it is enabling them to have a lifestyle they cannot afford.
> 
> Giving a son or daughter a gift of a down payment on a mortgage if you can afford to is fine by me. You are helping them get on the property ladder but then expecting them to make mortgage payments on their own. Paying part or all of their mortgage payments or rent is NOT helping but enabling. Living within their means, means just that. If they cannot afford to pay $2000 in rent then they need to find somewhere cheaper to rent. If they cannot afford the latest version iPhone then they need to get a cheaper cellphone, not have you pay for it.
> 
> ...


I do believe there is a very fine line between spoiling, enabling and helping. It is difficult to see as a parent. I see it all the time as its actually not the action or the financial help itself, but the intent and context behind it. As a parent I will do everything in my power to help my kids succeed and hit their full potential. Helping them do this, means guiding and supporting them with the goal of them being able to do this themselves. I am there just to speed a long the process a bit and help them stay on track. The expectation is that my child is working towards this own self sufficiency, and they recognize that they are fortune that someone is helping them, but this is there journey. 


If I am enabling them, then they are getting the results only because I am doing everything for them, and they have not taken the effort to move themselves along the way. The expect results to happen FOR them, not because of any effort they have done themselves.


It is a very fine line, and a difficult one for parents to be too hands off or too hands on. I volunteer with a lot of kids who come from fairly affluent families. I can see where the ones where they are entitled and spoiled already. They are ones that expect me to do everything for them, or do not contribute to the group unless there is something for them, or let other kids do their work. It's not because they get more than other kids, its that their parents do everything for them without the goal of them ever learning. When the kids are doing something that are difficult, the kids that have been supported will ask me for help and then try it themselves, the kids that are enabled expect me to do it for them.


----------



## OhGreatGuru (May 24, 2009)

The "over 90%" sounds high, until you read the article more carefully. They are referring to parents of adult children between ages 18 and 35. How many parents are not supporting their children through post-secondary education? (which would include all RESP's presumably) The number drops to 48% for children between 30 and 35. Even that sounded high to me, but when I see what housing costs in Vancouver and Toronto it's a little more understandable.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

These CMF examples are from 10-20 years ago and the costs of adult children have gone up astronomically since then. The price seems to go up continuously because all parents instinctively want their child to have a leg up over the others. First they all needed to go to university but now even that is not enough. They need to be athletic, artistic, socially adept (expensive trendy appearance etc) and who knows what else to compete. I know several engineers who had to go back to school for trades or take entry level jobs (removed engineering from their resume because that made them overqualified) 

When I was volunteering with the alumni club +15 years ago I heard something that has stuck with me forever and changed my understanding of post secondary education/business. "Parents will pay anything for this!" they said. They were talking about a must have new item I was providing at minimal cost to be marked up 5x more. Of course the parents paid it, they all bought 2 or 3. It funded most all of the extracurricular clubs and more by itself. When I look at the price of school books and tuition and various "must haves" it's clear to me that someone somewhere said "Parents will pay anything for this!"

Why do all the top universities need pristine gardens and castle like buildings? It's as if they don't know what to spend their money on. I've seen what they spend their money on and a lot of it has nothing to do with education. Now we have a growing student debt crisis in both Canada in US. While the actual product of university hasn't really changed (it's even obsolete when you realize you can learn anything online for free, even university courses) the price keeps going up because everyone needs a degree today and affluent parents will pay anything, and they rest get buried in student debt.

The last line of this article sums it up "Canada’s students are good business."


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Actually, I’m finding the cost of education to be quite reasonable compared to when I went to school. My kid get their books online for free, I own a rental right by the school so they get free parking, they get basic medical and dental coverage as part of their student fees, they make and bring bring their own lunch, they get a guaranteed summer job placement as part of his program...the only “extra” I had to buy was a laptop and that was optional, they didn’t have one the first semester and did fine, but most notes are online and it allowed them to stay at school and work. 

Overall, though tuition has gone up, it’s way cheaper now than it was when I went.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

Times have changed. In my day you were expected to quit school the day after your 16th birthday and get a job, and start paying for room and board out of your first pay cheque, and not at cheap rates either. I was also expected to get a part time job and buy my own clothes, school supplies etc from the age of 13.


----------



## Gruff403 (Jan 30, 2019)

One of our children wanted a cell phone while in High School. Told him he had to have $1000 saved first and he did it. Good thing as his first bill was $400+ as a result of not signing up for a texting plan. We quickly changed that. As a teacher/parent one of my philosophies was "you don't teach responsibility by taking it away". When I see parents telling there children to order Skip the Dishes for lunch at school because they are to lazy to make a lunch-that's scary. When I went to High School everyone walked or took a bus and the poor kid who got driven to school got teased. I finished my teaching career in the same High School I graduated from and what a difference. It seemed that more than half the kids were being driven to school by their parents, so many it plugged the parking lots and the teachers couldn't get in. It nearly came to blows a few times - fun to watch.
We helped our kids with their education but they also contributed. My middle child wanted a break from University after first year. Fine we said - your rent starts in a month so get a job. He did.
Our kids are launched and on their own ages 23-29. They are welcome home anytime to deal with a crisis. Not being able to pay your bills is not a crisis. Divorce maybe would qualify. Some of their friends still live at home and pay no rent. They all comment on how their friends are spoiled. Our kids don't want to come home because they know they won't get away with crap. Life is more fun on their own. Although we never stop being their parents and will always help them, (not financially) we love them enough to let them struggle and fail and pick themselves up. Stop trying to be their best friends. Can't afford the rent - get some roommates.
Funny story. During my second year University my parents and I were living in a basement apartment in Calgary. They approached me and said they were moving to Southern Alberta for work and if I wanted to keep the apartment I might consider getting a roommate. I never got a chance to move away from home, home moved away from me. One of the best things that could have happened as I learned independence quickly.
By the way, my book on how to be the perfect parent is almost finished.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

My boat conked out on a northern lake in May and there was almost nobody around. Finally our yelling attracted a guy who came out and pulled our boat over to his cottage.

No road access, no neighbors and he and his wife lived there year round.

"How did you decide to live here", I asked. "When I retired we decided to sell everything in Oshawa and come live here", said the GM retiree.

"No kids", says I.

"Oh yea" he says...."when we left I saw them in the rear view mirror. They were standing on the driveway. They didn't believe we would really leave"......he laughed.

I have never understand how parents could do that.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Well, you could live on the same street as your kids and almost never see them.

I suspect there is a lot more to the GM guys story then just the joke he made...but who knows.

By the way, at my cottage people ask me about the cottages a distance up the river and I tell them I have never seen them. I prefer not to take the boat much farther then I can row and I always prefer to be up river if I do. So far my fishing boat has never let me down but except for an airplane's motor, your boat motor failing is about the worst motor that can ever fail on you. You never know how hard is was working until the oars come out.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

LOL..........tell me about it.

My boat was a 21 foot inboard with a couple of paddles........which were pretty much only good for pushing off from rocks.

I wouldn't go out now without a kicker motor, just in case.

It is surprising how many people want to live in isolated places. My buddy visited a couple who lived way back in the woods. He wasn't sure they even owned the land or were squatters.

It was black fly season and he had a heck of time getting back to them. When he was there the guy says........"Don't mention anything about dogs. A bear killed our dog and my wife grabbed the rifle and went out and laid in the grass for days. She hung a hunk of meat and waited for the bears to come by. The black flies ate her alive but she shot every bear that ambled in. She is a little grouchy about the dog."

My buddy says he never went back to visit again. It was like a scene out of the movie Deliverance.


----------



## Mechanic (Oct 29, 2013)

We encouraged our kids to save towards things they wanted and matched their savings to get things they wanted as they grew up. We helped our kids pursue their chosen education but supplied needs not wants by paying for accomodations/transport/meals/tuition/books and supplies etc. as they had to relocate to do that. They worked part time for other things they wanted. We did provide first vehicles but they were used. One kid wanted new and indicated how a friend had been given new but we said that was up to them and pointed to other friends that didn't get either. We also had to save for our own retirement so couldn't just give everything. Our kids commented about how hard we worked and I think that helped instill a good work ethic in them but they both said they weren't going to put as much time and effort into work as we did, but that is what a strong desire to succeed takes imo. Both kids are now in their late 30's, married with families and are doing well. One even has a paid off home and vehicles, I share what I have learned about investing since retiring and he is getting a nice investment strategy going as he wants to retire early like we did. Other one is doing ok too and has an income property. We did tend to encourage our kids to get into the work force and earn, rather than push for higher education, probably due to the fact that we went that route ourselves.


----------



## lonewolf :) (Sep 13, 2016)

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> I read that survey with interest as well. I think we need to consider that the survey was conducted for RBC and was a limited (1,004 individuals) online survey.
> I also felt that their title, "Parental Paradox: Trying to save for retirement while supporting adult children" may have been a bit self-serving.
> 
> 
> ...


 RBC has skin in the game they are making a fortune having parents cosign student loans. RBC wants to promote helping kids is the in thing to do to get more student loans cosigned by the parents.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

I think focusing on the motivation of RBC in doing the survey or how they presented their conclusions is a waste of time. Sure they wanted to tell people, 'here's why you should have RBC helping you decide how to deal with these issues.' There's no surprise in that.

But whatever their motivation is, is irrelevant. The fact is the numbers are there for all to see and for each parent to consider just how they fit into those facts.


----------

