Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Most I know started with very little and many have made a very comfortable life and a few are quite wealthy... most are still very frugal and simply cannot stand to see waste... not wanting or being able to use something is one thing... saying that when so and so dies were are getting a dumpster or having a bonfire is quite another and could only happen in a society of plenty... nothing directed personally towards you.
February, a long time friend sold his home and moved to assisted living... his daughters live on the other side of the country... he was troubled not knowing what to do with household things like washer/dryer, kitchen pots and pans, utensils, china etc and asked me to help..
1. I don't know anyone that would "start a bonfire" to rid themselves of their deceased parents possessions.
2. I don't think ANYONE would have a problem finding people that could use, and were grateful for, hand me downs. This thread topic is not about that. Its about children that are either unable to, or unwilling to, take over their parents possessions after they are gone.
When I grew up there was actually a fix-it shop in town... people would bring in lamps that needed a new cord or blinds needing a new ladder (I think that's the term)
Where I bought my second home my neighbors had all moved in the 1930's and no one ever left... I bought my home from the original owner as mentioned before.
What impressed me is these mostly 80 year old widows all had tool boxes, did their yard work, had pruning shears and a basically what was needed for basic household repairs...
Maybe that time has passed and being self reliant and able just isn't a trait valued today...
Not at all. Why do you even think that? I have a garage full of tools and I know how to use all of them. I do my own yardwork. I just finished redoing my bathroom. My last car had 247000 miles on it before it croaked. I think you assume an awful lot that is not at all true.
Ok, I have many collectibles and went to a local "antique roadshow" at a local golf course lase year.
The reality is that anything related to a dining room (china, crystal, glass) or anything related to tools that do anything are of no value. No one even wants a dining room anymore... hardly need the kitchen. Military items, auto/car items, weapons, etc. are the real valuables.
Why should I (as a millennial) spend $2,000 or $3,000 or more each year in order to house a bunch of stuff I don't use, just to look at it once a year?
Would you spend $2,000 or $3,000 to go to an art gallery/museum for an hour or two?
1. I don't know anyone that would "start a bonfire" to rid themselves of their deceased parents possessions.
Me either yet my comment is in reference to posts found in this thread and the bonfire was specifically regarding:
I watched my WW II generation relatives break the handles off 100 year old Belgian china coffee cups and break the plates when my grandmother died. They didn't want anyone to have the set, which was a full service for 16, which had been brought over when she immigrated to the US. The same with a Prussian Army officer's sword, broken in half in a shop vise. Antique tools from that shop were thrown into a 55 gallon drum piled with wood, doused with gasoline and set on fire. Hand blown German Christmas ornaments used as target practice with .22s.
I tried to tell them that some of the individual items were worth hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars. All to the landfill and the bony pile at a local coal mine.
2. I don't think ANYONE would have a problem finding people that could use, and were grateful for, hand me downs. This thread topic is not about that. Its about children that are either unable to, or unwilling to, take over their parents possessions after they are gone.
Many of the posts also deal with possessions from alive and well parents... like Grandma sending over things each time the kids come home from a visit or letting the kids know she would like to give something away.
Many different reasons have been posted... on the move, no room, would never use, over my dead body... (added for dramatic effect)
Having been around old and elderly a lot and seeing how hard some elderly take this... I wanted to show the other side of how accepting a gift can be a wonderful and gracious act because of the meaning it has for the gifter...
No ulterior motive on my part and I certainly don't have all the answers...
Why should I (as a millennial) spend $2,000 or $3,000 or more each year in order to house a bunch of stuff I don't use, just to look at it once a year?
Would you spend $2,000 or $3,000 to go to an art gallery/museum for an hour or two?
It's the same thing - in a sense...
They shouldn't unless they want too... storage other than short term is always a loosing proposition.
I've seen many cases of kids from all generations say they don't want anything from the parents or grandparents etc... can be especially difficult for those that are married when one does and the other doesn't.
Locally there was a long and drawn out family battle after the folks died... only one of the kids showed any interest and she was left all personal property... home, savings, pension, stocks were all equally divided.
You would have thought the other kids were robbed because the other wanted Mom's jewelry sold and the will was very explicit... and their were other items like family papers from the Donner party and moving West that no one had shown any interest and when asked wanted no part... that is until someone else has it...
All right, I've reread the original article and this line seemed appropriate:
Quote:
[...]it’s not that they don’t love you. They don’t love your furniture.
My mother has an enormous collection of stoneware in Pfaltzgraff's "Yorktowne" pattern. It's used three times a year; she got it at an estate sale for a ridiculously low price. It will probably go to my brother when she dies, and I'm fine with that: even if it were my style, I don't have room in my kitchen for more than the plain white china setting for 4 that's there now.
When my son moved into his first apartment with his then-partner, he left a small closetful of boxes; within a month a storage unit had become available in his building, and he picked up the rest of his things. Over the 2 years he spent there, he discarded about 80% of the contents; when he moved 800 miles for work, he let go of even more. He's now in a 500 square foot studio, furnished primarily from estate sales and Craigslist -- if I had furniture to give him, where would he put it?
I think a lot of it has to do with timing. I have furniture from my grandmother I acquired in college. After graduation I received a vanload from my grandfather. All of this furniture is in use today 35 yrs later. Now I am trying to accommodate my mom's Danish modern items. But my cousin's daughter in CA is interested in her great-grandmother's stuff as she is setting up housekeeping. I guess the motto is to downsize at the time the grandkids are getting started, but maybe it is telling that only one of the millennial generation is interested in this stuff. Now we have to deal with the logistics of getting it to CA.
But here's where the califorincation of Nashville may be coming in handy. Neicelet is coming for a wedding, maybe she can drive and take furniture back. Set up a sideline of moving her friends to Nashville and returning with grandmas stuff???? Maybe she will succumb to Nashville's hipster allure - that would make the transfer very easy as I am in Knoxville.
I notice so many well-made items at antique shops and tell DH that adult children often just want to clear an estate quickly. They either don't know or don't care about the value.
It's good not to be attached to things (notice they don't need to own music lol the way we did; they can just access it). But the brown furniture comments were sad. So many are buying into the shiny white doors, moulding, and baseboards, and wood just doesn't fit in. As for me, I'll take rich wood over cheap-looking trim any day!
To me, this seems to be the thing that keeps getting left out of the conversation. Many young people in 2015 are more accustomed to the idea of living in smaller spaces where it's just not practical to accumulate a lot of things.
M wife and I are a childless couple on the younger end of Gen X; we live like many urban Millennials. We've both lived in apartments since the early 2000's, downsizing several times to stay within the metro area close to work despite climbing rents. We just don't have room for stuff that's not essential- we live in a one bed one bath apartment with two small closets.
We do take some hand-me-downs from our folks, but we also say "no thanks" if we don't have anywhere to put it or don't see a reason to have it. Moving four times in eight years has a way of making you a minimalist.
If millennials are so intent on living in small spaces, I support that as I, too, live a fairly minimal life (one bed, one sofa, one dining table, etc.) in spite of being a baby boomer. But then who is it who buys all the McMansions (large houses on tiny lots) that STILL keep springing up everywhere, even since the mortgage crisis? Every one of the baby boomers I know is looking to downsize as their children have left home and they have no reason for a living room AND a family room, four+ bedrooms, and an equal number of bathrooms.
I think part of the explanation for your way of life is the word "urban." You want to live in the heart of a metro, which is something I find irresistible. BUT how many people, once they have children, stay in apartments/condos in city centers? Not all that many and if they do they would have to have very well-paying jobs.
Where I live, the new construction that seems to be the norm is (1) "luxury" apartment buildings. Meaning apartments that rent for an average of $1,000 and come with gyms, pools, outdoor exercise spaces, indoor rec rooms, media rooms, and coffee bars. The other type (2) is the single family home of 2,500 sq. ft. and up. Neither of those types of housing seem to be what downsizing baby boomers want. Those who can afford it might go for a 55+ active adult community, which is usually an exurb. But for those who don't like or can't afford that lifestyle, we're pretty much looking for housing better suited to newlyweds. And wherever that turns out to be, we won't have a ton of closet space to keep stuff the "greatest generation" pushed on us.
Personally, I think the buyers of the 2,500+ sq. fit. houses are Gen Xers and you, BATCAT, are just an atypical one of those.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
