To think children should be taught financial literacy?

[HeidiHaughton]

All the threads from women in such precarious financial situations. Never seemed to occur to them the cost of not working. And the invariable refrain that it "didn't make sense to go back after maternity leave". Surely as a social good people should be educated about how finances work.

Also, I think girls are often cultured into not thinking about the practical monetary aspects of life.

I think this circles back to the starting question though, about SAHM (especially unmarried ones) not realising how precarious their situations are.

Plenty of women only seem to work as something to do until they have a baby, so they don’t need to pay attention to money because a man will deal with that for them. Unfortunately a lot of men then want a tight control on finances and the woman ends up screwed over, which is partly if her own making.

I’m really honest about finances with my children, as I’ve gone from being broke to having a decent amount of money.

I teach them about buying shares (GameStop has helped with this one), assessing risk, taxing yourself first when you get paid and putting money in savings, not blowing loads of money on a cool car which will only depreciate etc.

I figure if they only listen to 10 percent of it, it’s better than the info I got from my parents!

@Dobedohdahdee

Absolutely agree. I’m amazed at some of my friends - intelligent, university educated, yet don’t have pensions.

In one case a friend’s old(ish) parents bought him a house outright, but his house is in their name (ie his parents).

And I don’t know anyone in real life who doesn’t work but the amount of threads you read on here where an unmarried woman is considering giving up work because her (D)P thinks she should...

Mind boggles

Argh the first bit of this always breaks my head - don't they realise that if the decide not to be in one where your employer matches your contribution they are giving away free money? I bet they wouldn't turn down a bonus! It's so short sighted 🤯

@MaskingForIt

Also, I think girls are often cultured into not thinking about the practical monetary aspects of life.

I think this circles back to the starting question though, about SAHM (especially unmarried ones) not realising how precarious their situations are.

Plenty of women only seem to work as something to do until they have a baby, so they don’t need to pay attention to money because a man will deal with that for them. Unfortunately a lot of men then want a tight control on finances and the woman ends up screwed over, which is partly if her own making.

Not just in cases of SAHM, but also the tragedies of life. Widowhood, disability, etc, that can all happen to the earner/non earner.

My husband and I are both well aware of family tragedies. My mum's first husband was an alcoholic abuser who stole all their joint money. His dad died when he was four. My husband isn't an alcoholic abuser but he is still mortal. No job is 100% safe.

I find "all money is family money" posters insufferably smug, because the core of their belief is that they are protected by sharing everything.

The core of my marriage's finances is that each of us needs to be in a position to provide for this family before we have children and in the event of either of us dying. It's part of the reason I want a small family - I don't want more kids than I could cope with ALONE.

As such, we've worked our way to a position where either of us could take on the whole burden of the family finances, but we both independently thrive financially. It doesn't make us less of a team, it makes us more of one - we're far more easily able to snap our fingers and walk away than "all money is family money" couples, but we don't.

I teach it to 6th form in PSHE. the difference between credit and debit cards, what being overdrawn means, looking at average cost of various things. I agree that there should be a strand of maths that is more related to real world scenarios.. Tradespeople need maths to work out volumes of paint, areas of flooring plus doing quotes, vat, etc. I also 100% agree that state schools could and should go on til 4pm with optional extra activities offered until 5.30 or 6. The private sector do this and what we can cover and offer is hugely increased. We get paid the same as state but do have longer hols.. This is much more useful time than the 2-3 hours every day wasted by most teens when their school ends at 2.45 or 3pm. It would take an enormous shift in the sector though and huge recruitment to allow each teacher to not suddenly be having an increase in teaching load.

PHSE is teaching finances as I hear and help my daughter with these lessons. More than we got at school.

However, social financial education is maybe better placed at home but it depends how the parents see it. I think many people who are in poor financial positions do not see that they are in that position because of decisions they made (not everyone of course and I recognise not everyone has a choice over ever aspect of their lives).

Example, my mum messed around at school (despite having an educated mum as an example) so left with no qualifications. She got married at 17 and had me at 18. She was a sahm for a number of reasons but come 27, she was divorced with 3 children, no qualifications and very little work history/experience.

We were brought up on benefits with mum doing part time, low paid jobs. However, my mum recognised that much of our situation was caused by her own poor choices. She instilled in us that it was important to get an education, to work hard, to be established in your career/relationship before having children. My siblings and I are in very different situations than mum was and our children have different lives than we had. My siblings and I talk about how our children don't know how lucky they actually are. I hope my children learn from the example set at home rather than the example how how not to do things like we were.

@thecatsthecats

Pretty much agree with everything you’ve said, both parents should set themselves up to be able to provide for their children, but in some cases taking out life insurance can help to bridge a gap in earnings/lifestyle aims in the main earner dies.

From talking to friends who would benefit from it though, none seem to actually have it.

Our citizenship studies have a module about financial and economic literacy and competence. Obligatory for all from 14 onwards from this year. It's important.

(Not in the UK)

Financial literacy should be taught at school. Majority of parents in this country lack basic skills to teach their kids anything to do with finance.

Yanbu.
The amount of financial abuse that is rife on here and in real life.
The amount of women who truly think they have made it because their partner earns enough for them to sah from the minute they have a child. They don't seem to care about their own pension, being financially independent or investing. Leave it to the menfolk.
The people moaning about still living in rented accommodation in their late 30s 40s and 50s predicting house price crashes that rarely happen, blaming landlords, estate agents, the government, the EU etc. Anyone but their own choices.
Lots of people don't understand budgeting, don't have savings, many haven't made a will. Yet have debts and huge mortgages.
So many posts asking if they can afford private school/to leave their dh/manage on £100k a year.
Supposedly professional intelligent people clueless about what to do with 1k,10k, 50k etc.
So many out of touch with reality about what is a good salary. Claiming they could not possibly manage on less than £10k a month. Or 2k each disposable income.

Have you asked many children who grew up in poverty if they would have preferred not to be born at all?

Most people don't see it, but I think this type of argument is illogical. It is an irrational emotional argument based on the false premise that never having existed is the same as discarding your (say) 18-year-old life.

In one case a friend’s old(ish) parents bought him a house outright, but his house is in their name (ie his parents).

But then they haven't bought him a house, have they? They're letting him live rent free in a house they own, which is not the same thing.

Financial literacy would be great but I would suggest that it should be done properly. Some of the advice below regarding debt, mortgages etc.....is actually not financial literacy but just maths. This stuff is easy. Financial literacy, however, is thinking through things and knowing how to balance things out e.g. is it better to buy a bigger house now - and dowsize thus giving your kids a deposit or buying a smaller property and save money for your kids on the side? Does it make more sense to pay into a pension or a mortgage - depnding on the interest rate/rate of return. Would you take out a student loan or pay your tuition fees upfront. It's also this stuff that needs teaching.

I think a lot of people do not have financial literacy and by that I mean they do not quite think big when it comes to money. However, with lots of people now having their own pension pots (rather than assuming their employer just invests for them), having large mortgages (e.g. in the south east houses for 500k are the norm), student fees (in totally you could end up with 60k of debt) - much of our life has been financialised but most people's understanding and experience of finances remains rather limited. And therefore this needs addressing.

I think it could easily be incorporated into Mathematics. The biggest gripe I hear from people about Mathematics in general is how it doesn’t help in the real world, and incorporating real-life calculations such as pension planning, tax calculation and budgeting would provide much more benefit than, say, a whole term spent on studying differentiation!
It would also get them into using Excel calculations - something that many jobs require, too.

You’re not wrong op. I’ve been teaching my son for years.

Agree. We're teaching our teen about finances.

@whitepandas

Financial literacy would be great but I would suggest that it should be done properly. Some of the advice below regarding debt, mortgages etc.....is actually not financial literacy but just maths. This stuff is easy. Financial literacy, however, is thinking through things and knowing how to balance things out e.g. is it better to buy a bigger house now - and dowsize thus giving your kids a deposit or buying a smaller property and save money for your kids on the side? Does it make more sense to pay into a pension or a mortgage - depnding on the interest rate/rate of return. Would you take out a student loan or pay your tuition fees upfront. It's also this stuff that needs teaching.

I think a lot of people do not have financial literacy and by that I mean they do not quite think big when it comes to money. However, with lots of people now having their own pension pots (rather than assuming their employer just invests for them), having large mortgages (e.g. in the south east houses for 500k are the norm), student fees (in totally you could end up with 60k of debt) - much of our life has been financialised but most people's understanding and experience of finances remains rather limited. And therefore this needs addressing.

But all of that is just maths plus risk assessment. You can work out the relative likelihood of a range of outcomes using maths. Choosing which to pick is personal preference/ risk appetite.

Basic budgeting, managing finances and pension planning ought to be taught as part of PHSE. Not all parents can budget let alone pass on sensible advice. I have read so many threads about people who have never got around to starting a pen Sion and then suddenly panic at 40 or 50.

Yes - parents should do this. I talk to my children about finances all the time. As a teacher, I cover it in PSHE however as PSHE is so broad with all the things that need covered, it's a pretty light touch. Children are at school for only a certain number of hours a day.

Yeah. Crack on Op

I think it should, and I understand there is some being taught after an initiative by Martyn Lewis. Finding time by not teaching so much on other subjects is the challenge that needs to be faced, and I am sure if I proposed some subjects being dropped or taught less to 14/15 year olds I would get someone coming to the defence of a subject.

Could Rishi Sunak join in the classes, as he seems to need them too?

@PotteringAlong

I agree they should be taught by their parents, but I assume you mean at school. The question then becomes what do you want to get rid of out of the curriculum to add it in. There are not an infinite number of hours in the day to allow every life skill you might ever need to be taught in the classroom.

Get rid of algebra and the likes, in reality no one uses them outside of school unless in a specialised field

I don’t know. This smacks a little of the just world fallacy to me (aka people are poor bc they make bad decisions), also victim blaming (if women who get abused financially were smarter it wouldn’t happen).

Yes, in an ideal world, people would save for their kids future and teach them healthy money habits, but we don’t live in an ideal world.

They do teach it at my sons school in their pshe curriculumn. It crops up 3 times over the 5 years and in some of the maths too.

YANBU it is far more important than a huge amount of stuff on the curriculum.

There was a poster on here last week who’d never heard of private pensions. Admittedly that’s on the extreme side, but the ignorance is scary.