How long do you think children should expect parents to support them?

[TridenT]

Originally posted by: sash1
ITT: Spidey07 shows he's nothing more than a troll

For the nth time...

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon

Originally posted by: Modelworks
Support them til they are 18, then start charging them rent, utilities, food, etc.
Most tend to move out at that point .
Done with a niece , she decided it was better to be out on her own than pay $300 rent, $100 utilities, and still have to follow the house rules

why insist on treating your children like parasites once they magically become "responsible for themselves"? you no longer have a legal obligation, true, but for christ's sake they're your children.

i can't imagine my parents doing that to any of us. it really is unfathomable to me.

There's a huge difference. They're not parasites, you are giving them the tools and forcing them to become an adult (the goal of any parent). This is called parenting.

In all of the natural world the parent will force the child out of the nest and force it to no longer be dependent on the adult. The child doesn't want to leave of course as all it's needs are taken care of - in it's mind there simply is no reason to leave as you can see by a large number of responses here. The child cannot see past it's own self interests and that is a failure of the child and the parent.

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon

Originally posted by: Modelworks
Support them til they are 18, then start charging them rent, utilities, food, etc.
Most tend to move out at that point .
Done with a niece , she decided it was better to be out on her own than pay $300 rent, $100 utilities, and still have to follow the house rules

why insist on treating your children like parasites once they magically become "responsible for themselves"? you no longer have a legal obligation, true, but for christ's sake they're your children.

i can't imagine my parents doing that to any of us. it really is unfathomable to me.

There's a huge difference. They're not parasites, you are giving them the tools and forcing them to become an adult (the goal of any parent). This is called parenting.

In all of the natural world the parent will force the child out of the nest and force it to no longer be dependent on the adult. The child doesn't want to leave of course as all it's needs are taken care of - in it's mind there simply is no reason to leave as you can see by a large number of responses here. The child cannot see past it's own self interests and that is a failure of the child and the parent.

In all of the natural world animals have litters of young in hopes that some of them survive once they do get shoved out of the nest. Most reasonable people don't crank out 14 kids and thow them against the wall at 18 hoping that a couple of them stick.

 

[oznerol]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: ducci
I don't get the whole paying rent to the parents mentality. Realistically, how much does it cost to provide food and shelter for 1 extra person? I guess utilities would go up a bit due to extra electricity/water/gas used, but even that is what, $20 a month? Parents are going to be cooking food, paying for cable, etc whether or not their child is there.

I also don't know why people seem to think someone in their 20s living at home is a burden to the parents. How does having one of their kids in the house hold them back? I suppose it varies by family - and the age of the parents factors into that as well - my parents were fairly old when they had me.

Don't get me wrong, I'm anti-entitlement mentality, but the "be an adult already" argument is strange.

Families come in different shapes and sizes. Different things work for different people, and there's no one right way to do things for everyone. I think kids shouldn't demand anything more than love and encouragement from their parents once they have proper footing in the world. But I also think parents should be able to openly welcome their kids to live at home well into their 20s without being criticized. There is a point where they could be doing more harm than good, however - particularly if their kid is not actively growing or working toward a goal financially. But to give a kid a better head-start financially isn't the worst thing a parent can do.

A few problems 1) salaries taken by these kids are usually for much less and 2) much like when the wife went to work in the 50's it's causing inflation.

Soon to make ends meet you may have to have 3-4 incomes coming in at the middle class or lower.

Your argument is the one I find most interesting. So as I asked before - I'm curious if you have any substantial data showing the effects you are claiming? It's quite possible you're right, and I would like to read more on it, but I am coming up short finding any information. Are you just making assumptions about the effects of women in the workplace (and children living at home) having such a large impact on the US economy?

Thanks.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: vi edit

In all of the natural world animals have litters of young in hopes that some of them survive once they do get shoved out of the nest. Most reasonable people don't crank out 14 kids and thow them against the wall at 18 hoping that a couple of them stick.

Not in higher level/longer gestation (size) period mammals. These are all related. We are the only species that insists on the child being provided sustenance for 25+ something fucking years.

If you want to believe in Darwin so much, you MUST take it to the next logical level.

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: ducci

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: ducci
I don't get the whole paying rent to the parents mentality. Realistically, how much does it cost to provide food and shelter for 1 extra person? I guess utilities would go up a bit due to extra electricity/water/gas used, but even that is what, $20 a month? Parents are going to be cooking food, paying for cable, etc whether or not their child is there.

I also don't know why people seem to think someone in their 20s living at home is a burden to the parents. How does having one of their kids in the house hold them back? I suppose it varies by family - and the age of the parents factors into that as well - my parents were fairly old when they had me.

Don't get me wrong, I'm anti-entitlement mentality, but the "be an adult already" argument is strange.

Families come in different shapes and sizes. Different things work for different people, and there's no one right way to do things for everyone. I think kids shouldn't demand anything more than love and encouragement from their parents once they have proper footing in the world. But I also think parents should be able to openly welcome their kids to live at home well into their 20s without being criticized. There is a point where they could be doing more harm than good, however - particularly if their kid is not actively growing or working toward a goal financially. But to give a kid a better head-start financially isn't the worst thing a parent can do.

A few problems 1) salaries taken by these kids are usually for much less and 2) much like when the wife went to work in the 50's it's causing inflation.

Soon to make ends meet you may have to have 3-4 incomes coming in at the middle class or lower.

Your argument is the one I find most interesting. So as I asked before - I'm curious if you have any substantial data showing the effects you are claiming? It's quite possible you're right, and I would like to read more on it, but I am coming up short finding any information. Are you just making assumptions about the effects of women in the workplace (and children living at home) having such a large impact on the US economy?

Thanks.

It's a pretty simple concept of inflation really. Household incomes went up by 50% or more virtually overnight. When that much money magically appears people are less frugal with it. They pay more for items since they aren't bargain shopping as often, there is more demand for it since there are more people able to afford items.

 

[oznerol]

Originally posted by: vi edit
It's a pretty simple concept of inflation really. Household incomes went up by 50% or more virtually overnight. When that much money magically appears people are less frugal with it. They pay more for items since they aren't bargain shopping as often, there is more demand for it since there are more people able to afford items.

The concept I get, but I'm looking for some actual research done on this topic - particularly involving this relatively modern US trend of children living with their parents for a longer period of time. But even some data regarding women in the workplace and its overall effect on inflation and the economy would be nice.

It's a topic I might be inclined to bring up in conversation with some (eek) feminist friends of mine, and I'd like something more substantial to reference.

 

[rh71]

Originally posted by: spidey07

There's a huge difference. They're not parasites, you are giving them the tools and forcing them to become an adult (the goal of any parent). This is called parenting.

In all of the natural world the parent will force the child out of the nest and force it to no longer be dependent on the adult. The child doesn't want to leave of course as all it's needs are taken care of - in it's mind there simply is no reason to leave as you can see by a large number of responses here. The child cannot see past it's own self interests and that is a failure of the child and the parent.

Failure to do what now? Both my now-wife and I lived at our parents' places till 24, a few years of full-time work allowing us to buy a home. It was the grand scheme. I don't see how simply not paying for housing or food before then makes our lives a "failure". We have pretty good understanding of responsibilities and earning things we own, nothing has changed from 7 years ago when we moved out. The best part is we pass this on and set our kids up by giving them the same headstart. How are you better than us - that's what I am still trying to understand after 7 pages of reading... it only comes down to parenting correctly whether the kids are in the same house or not.

The financial hardship of one of those options is a lot greater. It will be your "self-interest" when you kick your kid out because they could learn the same lesson of responsibility while still in your house.

What is your profession? It's in the finance sector isn't it?

 

[Fenixgoon]

Originally posted by: rh71

Originally posted by: spidey07

There's a huge difference. They're not parasites, you are giving them the tools and forcing them to become an adult (the goal of any parent). This is called parenting.

In all of the natural world the parent will force the child out of the nest and force it to no longer be dependent on the adult. The child doesn't want to leave of course as all it's needs are taken care of - in it's mind there simply is no reason to leave as you can see by a large number of responses here. The child cannot see past it's own self interests and that is a failure of the child and the parent.

Failure to do what now? Both my now-wife and I lived at our parents' places till 24, a few years of full-time work allowing us to buy a home. It was the grand scheme. I don't see how simply not paying for housing or food before then makes our lives a "failure". We have pretty good understanding of responsibilities and earning things we own, nothing has changed from 7 years ago when we moved out. The best part is we pass this on and set our kids up by giving them the same headstart. How are you better than us - that's what I am still trying to understand after 7 pages of reading... it only comes down to parenting correctly whether the kids are in the same house or not.

The financial hardship of one of those options is a lot greater. It will be your "self-interest" when you kick your kid out because they could learn the same lesson of responsibility while still in your house.

What is your profession? It's in the finance sector isn't it?

precisely what i plan to do when i graduate. my job is near my parents house (where my dad used to work, actually), so it makes sense for me to stay a year or so and save up money for a down payment on a house.

 

[fleshconsumed]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: vi edit

In all of the natural world animals have litters of young in hopes that some of them survive once they do get shoved out of the nest. Most reasonable people don't crank out 14 kids and thow them against the wall at 18 hoping that a couple of them stick.

Not in higher level/longer gestation (size) period mammals. These are all related. We are the only species that insists on the child being provided sustenance for 25+ something fucking years.

If you want to believe in Darwin so much, you MUST take it to the next logical level.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_leopard

Takes 18-22 months to raise Snow Leopard cub until he can be self sufficient. AFAIK BBC Planet Earth actually said it was taking closer to two years to raise a cub. All species do whatever they can to ensure preservation of its species. If it takes two years to raise a cub, then so be it.

You kind of remind me of some religious guy who claimed homosexuality is unnatural because no animals do it. I guess he didn't watch nature channel either.


BTW, you never addressed the following: you lived at home after 18, are you a failure?

Originally posted by: AstroManLuca

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: hanoverphist

that goes against what a family is. family is not just a boot camp to get you ready for the war of life, it is your family, man. they are there for each other, they help out when needed, they hang out with you, celebrate with you, mourn with you. its a lifetime of companionship, not just a "18 year obligation" to get you ready for the real world. family is the only thing that will remain the same throughout your whole life. i have helped out family more than once, and they have helped me out when i needed it. thats what we are here for. too bad your family life apparently sucks, its a good feeling knowing youre not totally alone when you hit speed bumps in life.

My family life was great, best parents in the world. They provided me the tools to be a successful adult, part of that was making me realize that I should not be living at home after school. They didn't kick me out, they made me pay rent/utilities and made it clear that it should only be temporary, that I supposed to be an adult by then and need to start acting like one.

Best lesson they ever taught me.

So you lived at home but paid rent and utilities even after you turned 18? Man. You're such a failure at life. You're also a child.

 

[zerogear]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: NaOH
Spidey's lesson is, to be an adult you have to be a dumbass with your money and throw it all in the hole that is apt rent (setting yourself back many years). That's how you become an adult for fuck's sake!

Rent is hardly a 'hole' if you are budgeting it at the correct level...anyone that has any kind of real job should be able to easily afford a STARTER home esp. in today's market.

The problem is everyone expects to get a McMansion.

We did this in the 50's with a few women getting the idea to take up jobs to boost their position in life. Prior to that people had it pretty good. Most could look forward to having a decent home, car, put their kids through school and retire.

There it is.

 

[sandorski]

Take them to a Sweat Shop. If the Line Boss says they are a Good Worker, say Good Bye.

 

[BoomerD]

Originally posted by: ducci

It's a topic I might be inclined to bring up in conversation with some (eek) feminist friends of mine, and I'd like something more substantial to reference.

Looking for an easy way to commit suicide are ya? I can suggest far less painful methods.

 

[skyking]

Parents do what they can for their children because they can, not because they should.
I'll be making some huge generalizations but each has truth in it for someone you know.

1) Parents these days do too much material crap for their children starting at a very early age. They purchase objects based on a whole myriad of reasons including and especially about keeping up with other kid's parents. This sets up the whole value system for the remainder of the relationship. EVEN IF they have a great value system to teach, example will trump any other lesson.
2) This leads to a built in entitlement mentality. since the standards were set high, there is really no place to go but up now.
The parents set the crap bar up here:
^
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And the children have the financial ability to only get to here out of school:
^
|
|
|
|
|


Parents built the gap, nurtured the gap, and now they fill the gap between what they can do and what the child can afford. This destroys any self confidence or sense of accomplishment for the child, way more often than not.

As a parent, you need to calculate each and every purchase you make for your child even when very young, and what it will mean and how it relates to a self sufficient life.

Kids need to get to and from school activities and events, part time jobs etc. Sometimes it requires a car; sometimes not.
The car is not an automatic must have, nor is it something fancy. It belongs to the parent and the parent insures it. Even when you get your high school age child a car, take it yourself to work now and again, and make them do other arrangements. Make some excuse about car repairs on your car, etc. Remove the illusion that it is always there magically for them.

 

[puffff]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon

Originally posted by: Modelworks
Support them til they are 18, then start charging them rent, utilities, food, etc.
Most tend to move out at that point .
Done with a niece , she decided it was better to be out on her own than pay $300 rent, $100 utilities, and still have to follow the house rules

why insist on treating your children like parasites once they magically become "responsible for themselves"? you no longer have a legal obligation, true, but for christ's sake they're your children.

i can't imagine my parents doing that to any of us. it really is unfathomable to me.

There's a huge difference. They're not parasites, you are giving them the tools and forcing them to become an adult (the goal of any parent). This is called parenting.

In all of the natural world the parent will force the child out of the nest and force it to no longer be dependent on the adult. The child doesn't want to leave of course as all it's needs are taken care of - in it's mind there simply is no reason to leave as you can see by a large number of responses here. The child cannot see past it's own self interests and that is a failure of the child and the parent.

If i wanted to teach my kid to swim, I could throw him into a lake and hope he figures it out. Or I can get him lessons and start out at the shallow end of a pool. Either way, the kid is probably going to figure it out, but I would argue the second is a more compassionate way of parenting.

There's more than one way to get at the same result. You can teach your kids fiscal responsibility starting at a young age, in bite sized pieces, and have a responsible adult by the time they reach adulthood.

 

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: BoomerD

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: Modelworks
Support them til they are 18, then start charging them rent, utilities, food, etc.
Most tend to move out at that point .
Done with a niece , she decided it was better to be out on her own than pay $300 rent, $100 utilities, and still have to follow the house rules

Umm, why should anyone pay and then have to follow rules? It is one or the other.

Smiley face just means that she'd rather not live with an ass.

You have to pay to cover your costs...you have to follow the rules because...duh, MY house, MY rules...or gtfo.

Yes, you proved you are an ass already.

She is paying for the room and the ability to do whatever she wants in that room. You are an egomaniac control freak that wants to control after accepting the cash.

 

[RESmonkey]

Originally posted by: spidey07
If you still living at home at age 24 you are a complete failure at life honestly. If you can't put a roof over your head and provide for your life and self, well that's failure at life.

Area707 - by providing a roof over the head still classifies as failure of the child. The now mid 20s child can't even meet it's basic needs without assistance. The child is a failure at life and the parents are enabling this failure.

18 is the bar. Above and beyond that will only lead to the child's failure in life.

Way to make lifers look bad...

Have you thought of people who are going for 6 year + degrees at colleges?

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: BoomerD

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: Modelworks
Support them til they are 18, then start charging them rent, utilities, food, etc.
Most tend to move out at that point .
Done with a niece , she decided it was better to be out on her own than pay $300 rent, $100 utilities, and still have to follow the house rules

Umm, why should anyone pay and then have to follow rules? It is one or the other.

Smiley face just means that she'd rather not live with an ass.

You have to pay to cover your costs...you have to follow the rules because...duh, MY house, MY rules...or gtfo.

Yes, you proved you are an ass already.

She is paying for the room and the ability to do whatever she wants in that room. You are an egomaniac control freak that wants to control after accepting the cash.

Ever hear of a lease? In those landlords can specify what you can and can't do in there too. If you don't like the rules, don't move in.

 

[oznerol]

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: BoomerD

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: Modelworks
Support them til they are 18, then start charging them rent, utilities, food, etc.
Most tend to move out at that point .
Done with a niece , she decided it was better to be out on her own than pay $300 rent, $100 utilities, and still have to follow the house rules

Umm, why should anyone pay and then have to follow rules? It is one or the other.

Smiley face just means that she'd rather not live with an ass.

You have to pay to cover your costs...you have to follow the rules because...duh, MY house, MY rules...or gtfo.

Yes, you proved you are an ass already.

She is paying for the room and the ability to do whatever she wants in that room. You are an egomaniac control freak that wants to control after accepting the cash.

You need to follow "rules" anywhere you pay rent - regardless if it is at home or not. Some aren't as strict, but just because cash is exchanging hands rarely means you're free to do whatever you want.

Apartments have rules for no pets, no smoking, no excess noise, quiet hours, etc, etc. If you don't like those rules, you're free to look elsewhere where they might be more relaxed.

 

[BoomerD]

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Yes, you proved you are an ass already.

She is paying for the room and the ability to do whatever she wants in that room. You are an egomaniac control freak that wants to control after accepting the cash.

Why thanks. That's one of the nicest things anyone on these boards has ever said to me! :heart:

 

[Newfie]

Originally posted by: spidey07
If you still living at home at age 24 you are a complete failure at life honestly. If you can't put a roof over your head and provide for your life and self, well that's failure at life.

My brother lived at home till he was 24-25.

He got his honors degree in Geophysics, then his masters in the subject. For tuition, he paid ~$1,500 to goto a top class university in Earth Sciences not 15min away from here. Not a bad deal.

He is married and now travels the world doing a job he loves.

You fail at generalizing.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: NaOH

Considering that I am almost pay as much as my coworkers mortgage payments each month, I'd consider it a hole. I'd gladly pay the extra 300 extra bucks a month just to call the place mine down the line. Yeah, in a couple of years I should be able to afford one, but that doesn't mean the money I used on the apt wasn't a waste.

Seriously, from what I see, children are going to be children whether or not they live on their own or under daddy's roof. Just because they work and have their own place and pay their bills doesn't automatically make them responsible adults with no sense of entitlement. It'd be difficult for anyone to say otherwise. Hell, my roommate from college ended up flunking out because his parents did that crap. He didn't have ANYTHING (no car, had to ride bike everywhere) because he couldn't afford anything. Still was a lazy ass when it came to academics + time spent on working not studying. And yeah, we have the spoiled people who flunk out too.

This is what we have, lots of different ways of achieving the same goal. It all boils down to the individual who is trying to achieve those goals. Don't be bitter, resentful or outraged at the people like you who want to be successful and responsible, but are just doing it a bit differently.

And btw, I "moved out" (was living near school) a couple months after I graduated and have about 20K in school loans and 13K on my car. I love it, and make enough to live happily without worrying if my car will break down and not having any money to fix it. Still, who the hell wants to pay for something they can't keep, especially when it accounts for a good chunk of their monthly income (live in Irvine). As soon as I have enough in my account I'm slapping down the down payment and maybe paying 2-300 more than im paying now for rent.... :roll:

You are renting incorrectly then or should simply buy a place. I don't get your point above.

Like I said rent is not a hole unless you are overextending yourself. It's a usage cost.

You last point is fairy tale world...just like this adult kids are living.

No one wants to pay for things in life...it's just the right thing to do as an adult.

 

[Turin39789]

Originally posted by: puffff

If i wanted to teach my kid to swim, I could throw him into a lake and hope he figures it out. Or I can get him lessons and start out at the shallow end of a pool. Either way, the kid is probably going to figure it out, but I would argue the second is a more compassionate way of parenting.

There's more than one way to get at the same result. You can teach your kids fiscal responsibility starting at a young age, in bite sized pieces, and have a responsible adult by the time they reach adulthood.

WTF did you do for the first 18 years? Stare at the water?

 

[BrownTown]

So, if your going to medical school then you really can't take care of yourself until age 26 or so, does that make you a failure in life I wonder?

The point is I think some people have it backwards here, usually I would expect the person who spends MORE time living at home to be better off later in life. IF you are kicked out at 15 you will probably end up being manual laborer, if you get kicked out at 18 maybe you can pick up a decent trade. Kicked out after college and you can me pretty successful, but if you want to really be rich its the people who live off their parents going to medical school or law school etc. Its like I was saying before, I didn't have a single paying job until age 22, but the first job i had I am making $80,000 (including overtime). The time i spent working in high school and college paid off FAR more than a crappy job ever could. ow, obviously its not fair in life, but I never stepped foot in a public school in my entire life, i went to private elementary school, high school and college. MY parents invest several hundreds thousand collars into that education and intend to do the same for my kids. If you want to help your kids teaching them fiscal responsibility is great, but do it on the big picture, not over a minimum wage job. Working hard in life won't get you ANYWHERE without an education. I did a report for my economics class in high school essentially detailing the financial costs verse the worth of a college degree, and we are talking on the neighborhood of a million dollars over a lifetime.

 

[Rifter]

DId not read whole thread as i dont have all day, to answer OP i think 18 should be the cutoff. Anything after that and its not good for the kids. I moved out at 18 and i was only making $8