We’re spending the kids inheritance

[Tuppenceabaggy]

Does anyone find it weird when parents/older people say this and so proudly?

Ive heard a few times people saying they sacrificed everything for their kids, now it’s their time…is this a bit selfish/odd? Children don’t ask to be born, do they.

Now i’m a parent, I just find my parents and some others way of doing things quite odd.

My dad worked in a good job and Dm was a sahm. I had a part time job since I was 14, if I wanted something, I had to pay for it (except clothes treats out of Christmas and birthday money) I paid for all my own driving lessons (I had a lot and it cost a fortune) I bought my own car and paid insurance etc, Dh and I got our mortgage ourselves with no help.

Now I have Dd, there’s not a lot of spare cash to go around, but I will have a savings account in the event of going to uni (if she chooses to) helping with driving lessons and first car and hopefully a little help with a first home (provided we can try our best to save for this)

I don’t want my parents money, i’m
happy to see them spend it on themselves and enjoy it a bit, but it’s just not how I see my life, everything I think about is for Dd first.

Is this just a generational thing?

In that case OP, have you ever discussed this discrepancy with your mom or dad? I agree with you by the way.

I'm sorry your parents are so selfish and blinkered, but yet again (stuck record) not everybody their age is like that.

I only read the first page and it's already another Boomer bashing thread! I'm officially a Boomer, although I was born at the very end of it, in '63. I was like the OP though, never given money, had a PT job from 15, paid my own driving lessons, no foreign holidays, no help with mortgage etc. We struggled a lot through the years. It's only in the last few years I've had any spare money (redundancy and life insurance from DH dying) and I've been using it to help my DDs at every opportunity. I paid all their driving lessons, bought them both their first cars. Always helping them out here and there with money if they need it. You can't tar everyone with the same brush, just because of the generational era they were born.

More than 50 percent of mothers worked in 1970.

I think that some sort of middle ground is best, and that could be what some of those people mean. There is a difference between not helping and supporting your young adult DC at all and scrimping and saving your whole life so they don't have to at all.

I am helping my DC with driving lessons, university, etc but there will come a point where I will start prioritising my wants over, or at least equal to, theirs. No adult should be consistently going without so another grown adult, capable of working and saving for themselves doesn't have to.

I think it's something you reach when you realise that your life is now winding down and if you were frugal now is the time to spend. Your parents' money is not yours. They may decide not to leave it to you, may give it to a charity or to a remote cousin who bears their surname. It's theirs. The only things you can inherit by right are titles. Everything else is up to those who currently own it.

My DM talks like this - ‘about how much she gave up’ etc. to look after us. We had clothes and good food and that was it. No hobbies etc.

She now feels we should all be financially looking after her. It’s a horrible attitude and one I won’t be repeating

I felt like you. My child came first and when it came to spending money his needs ALWAYS came first.

Then he grew up into a young adult… and after seeing him pissing his (and my) hard earned money away on gadgets, bitcoin, drinks, technology, smoking, going out and any other crap I simply can’t afford, I can comfortably say that I prefer to squander my hard earned savings myself, than handing it to him to be wasted on things he won’t appreciate as he has not had to work for them himself.

Having said that, I would be happy to contribute to a house deposit, if he looks like he is good at managing finances by then. Otherwise… nope, not anymore.

Well said, @ElizaMulvil

Especially this!

The past 'Boomers' you malign in your ignorance, fought for the rights you take for granted now, achievements which you benefit from more than they could, literally risking their livelihood so you wouldn't have to live through the same as they did - so you have equal pay, pensions rights, holiday pay, sick pay, comprehensive education, access to GCSE, A levels, employment rights, anti discrimination v women, blacks, Irish , disabled etc etc.

This is why recent History should be a compulsory subject in schools. People who don't know their History and value the past battles are doomed to relive the pas

Well DH and I are nasty, wicked, greedy boomers:

I was born in 1960 and DH 1961. I was privileged; DH was not. He was the one to go to Oxford and I went to a red brick bit dropped out, did a secretarial ourselves, learnt to cook, spent a year in Europe.

We got married in our early 30s and had DC mid to late 90s. DH's career took off. From 1982 until 1992 I don't recall interest rates being much less than 12% and remember the peak at 15%.

I recall the early 80s recession, the early 90s recession where many folk were repossessed (you know disgusting boomers). If anything Blair's tax credits fuelled house price inflation disproportionately.

Anyway I have worked from the age of 20 and am almost 65, except for 7 years at home with the DC. DH has worked full-time since about 23/24. Of our generation only about 5% went into HE.

We are not spending the children's inheritance. They are provided for. They were bought, in trust, a small house each in SW London, zone 3, in 2006. They had the best education money could buy and went to Oxford and Cambridge. Both are able to do the jobs they love rather than chase the money. Their grandmothers who are 88 have been persuaded to leave their money directly to the children, bypassing us because we don't need it.

Between us DH and I have worked for 78 years full-time. We have amassed significant assets and when we retire in the next 12 to 18 months we are going to enjoy ourselves and the DC can have what's left.

Not all boomers are dreadful and some do put their children first and always have.

Utterly vile attitudes on this thread.

However, our mothers and we, joke often about spending the children's inheritance. It's a joke!

i didn’t go to university. Yes in my day in was free but only about 5% of the population went. Tuition fees were free but your parents had to contribute to living expenses if you earned more than the average wage. There were no loans and a lot of parents didn’t want to pay. Some parents thought you should send your sons to university but not your daughters.

Carbon. According to data

www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/baby-boomers-greenhouse-gas-emissions-b2043755.html

This is very true. I had friends whose parents brought them to all their activities, helped with cars, deposits etc.

I also have friends whose parents were like mine and did the absolute minimum

I quite agree. Hurrah for some sanity.

I don't recall interest rates being much less than 12% and remember the peak at 15%.

Are today's rates of 5% that different when you are talking higher figures?

To people moaning about boomers benefiting from no university fees, do you realise that only about 5% of people went to university in the early 1960s, rising to 15% through the 70s, so most of them will have worked since the age of 15 or 16. I'm not a boomer, but even when I did A levels in the mid 80s, it wasn't the norm to stay on at school beyond 16.

Well, as someone who is approaching retirement in the next 5-10 years I fully intend to enjoy it and spend my hard earned money ! My kids are costing me a fortune presently- much more as teens then they did when they were toddlers. And we still have the joy of university coming up very soon. We’ve made loads of sacrifices over the years making sure they have had nice holidays, school trips, latest gadgets, day trips out in the school holidays. I hardly ever had nice things for myself and have worked full time to ensure my kids didn’t go without and yes there will be driving lessons if that’s what they want . But, once they are earning then yes - it’s my turn! I want the nice holidays and to treat myself. I don’t see it as spending my children’s inheritance and would be gutted if my children were selfish enough to see it that way. I hope my children are happy I am enjoying my time after all the years of hard work - just like I tell my mum and parents in law to spend their money now as they can’t take it with them and it’s theirs to enjoy. I don’t understand people that would be upset at this!

Apologies, misread that post as being about how boomers were parented, not their DC. Shouldn't respond to posts while watching telly!

I’m on both sides.

my parents have helped my sibling and I out hugely, financially. They have been very generous and we are grateful.

at the same time a lot of their wealth is unearned. They benefitted from a significant tax free inheritance, from rocketing property prices through the 80s and 90s and from generous pension schemes- none of which are available to my generation. They bought a flat in 1990 for about £95k, and sold it 10 years later for nearly £400k. As my dad said, it beats working for a living.

so I’m not quite in the ‘they worked hard for it, they deserve to enjoy it as they want to’ camp. They did work hard, but they also befitted hugely from a specific set of economic and social circumstances that are no longer available to their equally hard working children and grandchildren.

As to "free university for boomers," well, according to the BBC:

"In 1970, about 8% of students in the UK graduated from university. This was a significant increase from 1950, when only 3% of students went to university."

The rest of the "lazy" boomers were working straight out of school.

My Mum is not really like that, she's always trying to give me money even now, despite the fact that I have a good job and our household income is far higher than hers ever was. My husband is from a different culture, one where once you reach adulthood the children pay for things for their parents. His parents don't necessarily want the kids to pay, but that's the etiquette, it's been quite eye opening and not in a bad way.

However, our mothers and we, joke often about spending the children's inheritance. It's a joke!

But surely if you paid for PE & bought your dc a house they are aware it's a joke which is different to what the OP is saying? 😆

@OMGitsnotgood that's tripped me up before! 😆

Seriously????

Loving the goady thread.

The economy is different to what it was during the boomers time. Property though seemed expensive was actually affordable (even with high mortgage rates).

Now rent is about 2/3 of someone’s take home salary meaning people can’t afford to save for a deposit.Without my parents help it would have been impossible to get on the housing ladder.

Things that were seen as a luxury then i.e electronics and holidays are now essential (ie phones and computers) and affordable (international travel). This is where boomers are missing the point.

But Gen Z and millennials are also not entitled to the money until it’s in the bank account. You can’t guarantee an inheritance until your parents have died. My grandmother (the one with all the money) is still alive at 101 and has no signs of slowing down. When she does die all of her children will be over 70. So there is no chance I will get hers or my parents due to costs of care.